•YAJLE-WHHVEKSinnr- ILHEIBAlSy

DIVINITY SCHOOL
TROWBRIDGE LIBRARY

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

CHRISTIANITY AND SECULARISM.

OPINIONS OF THE PRESS.
" "We commend it to the careful and respectful perusal of our readers."— Reasoner.
" Radiant with intellectual light."— British Messenger.
"A very clear, compendious, and able vidimus of the subject, and calculated,
from its size and shape, as well as from its execution, to be very useful." — Rev.
George Gilfillan.
" The work bears evident marks throughout of high talent and great research."
— Scottish Press.
" This author is no windy polemic. Almost every page of the little work bears
evidence that the author is ahard thinker and diligent student. The style is terse and
vigorous, and the argument proceeds with clearness and force." — Aberdeen Herald.
" The object of this treatise is to meet secularists on their own ground. This
task is accomplished in a most satisfactory manner, in ten short chapters, in which
the leading doctrines of the Christian faith are established on grounds which reason
must acknowledge to be sufficient, and does in all other matters acknowledge to
be sufficient. The spirit in which the whole discussion is carried on is admirable."
— Scottish Guardian.
" Such as are capable of relishing a subtle ethical disquisition may expect a treat
of no common order. The writer is one of those close, logical thinkers, more nearly
allied to the controversialists of a former and sturdier generation, than the literati
of the present age of light and flashy writing. This book is the production of a
man awake to the great realities of life, and anxious to assist others who may be
struggling with error. AVe recommend this book as a work of the right sort, and
which, if force of reasoning could suffice, might convert even Mr. Holyoake him
self."— Caledonian Mercury.
"Many of the thoughts interspersed throughout this small treatise are striking
and pregnant, and are pervaded by a fine Christian spirit. Opponents are met by
argument, not by invective ; so that to all interested in speculative questions we
can recommend the work, as containing a clear and masterly refutation of the
doctrines now in vogue among secularists and free-thinkers in general." — The
Witness. " The principles of this author are those of the Scottish School of Philosophy, of
which he makes a most vigorous and successful application to this controversy.
The book is one of decided promise. "We give a specimen of the writer's strength of
thought and clearness of style." — United Presbyterian Magazine. By Rev. Dr. Cairns.
" A brief but valuable book. Mr. Scott is thoroughly master of his subject. His
argument takes a wider range than secularism, which is the modern phase of
atheism. The counter arguments are stated with perfect fairness and candour, and
refuted with real ability. The book is highly creditable to Mr. Scott's talents and
acquirements, and must weigh with the more thoughtful infidels." — British and
Foreign Revieiv. By Principal Cunningham.
" A book of invincible logic. "—Meliora.

PRINCIPLES

NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.

PRINTED BY LORIMER AND GILLIES
FOR
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.
LONDON, . . . HAMILTON, ADAMS, AND CO.
DUBLIN, .... ROBERTSON AND CO.
NEW YORK, . . SCRIBNER, WELFORD, AND ARMSTRONG.

PRINCIPLES

NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION
ESTABLISHED AND APPLIED TO
BIBLICAL SCIENCE.

BY THE
REV. JAMES SCOTT, M.A., B.D.
• i i

' ' Truth, like a torch, the more 'tis shaken, it shines. "

EDINBURGH:
T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

MDCCCLXXV.

PREFACE.

This work consists of five principal parts — the forms
of New Testament quotation, together with their
analogous patristic and classical forms, their principles
of interpretation, the vindication of these principles,
and their application to biblical studies. Its object
is to verify and vindicate them by the analogy of
patristic, ecclesiastical, and classical citation, and to
apply the principles evolved to biblical doctrine,
exegesis, and apologetics.
We believe that biblical students, for whom
chiefly the work is designed, will readily admit the
necessity of some such work, especially on the prin
ciples of interpretation involved in the quotations of
the New Testament from the Old. It is needed at
once to stimulate and to facilitate biblical studies, and
not only to shed some light on a broad and dark
domain of Scripture, but to furnish keys of solution.
We have endeavoured to supply this desideratum in
some measure, not by a special examination and
defence of all the instances, which has been already

VI PREFACE.
done by several critics, but by presenting principles of
interpretation and the logic of the whole subject on
an ample basis of induction in biblical and cognate
quotation, and with special reference to the wide
and important field of biblical apologetics. This is
attempted throughout upon rational principles, which,
if successfully applied, justify the title of the work.
We append an index of quotation passages, and
prefix a table of contents, together with a list of works
consulted or referred to in this volume in connection
with the literature of the subject, which is neither
extensive nor exhaustive, to none of which are we so
much indebted as to Mr. Turpie's able and scholarly
works, " The Old Testament in the New," and " The
New Testament View of the Old."
Abeeloue, 1875.

PAGE

CONTENTS.

PART I.
Jjjnmtks .of (Quotation.
SECTION FIRST.
Importance of the Subject — Number of Quotations and of Quota
tion Passages — Sources of Quotations — Their Classification —
Formulas of Citation and their Classification — Unaccredited
Citations by Satan and Uninspired Men Irrelevant, . .17

Jforms oi (Quotation.
SECTION SECOND.
Their Classification — Literal, Substantial, Synthetic, Analytic, and
Idealistic Citation — Examination of Instances — Allusion, . 21

PART II.
iprinrijjfes at Interpretation:.
SECTION FIRST.
Connection between Forms and Principles of Quotation — Classifica
tion of Principles — Examination and Illustration of Instances —
Psychological, Grammatical, Analogical (Facts, Principles, Doc
trines), Synthetic, and Prophetic Principles of Interpretation, . 32

V1U CONTENTS.
SECTION SECOND. PAGE
Prophecy, Direct and Indirect ¦ — Typical Messianic and Non-
Messianic Prophecy, .... 51

PART III.
%tmtaa,aix8 (^notation.
SECTION FIRST.
Patristic Quotation from Old Testament — Its Sources — Quotation
Formulas — Correspondence with Formulas of New Testament, . 63
SECTION SECOND.
Forms of Citation — Literal, Substantial, Synthetic, Paraphrastic,
Eclectic — Patristic Allegory — Its Causes and Effects, . .67
SECTION THIRD.
Patristic Citation of New Testament — Literal, Substantial, Syn
thetic, Idealistic Quotation— Patristic Allusion — Degrees of
Allusion, General, Special, and Literal — Logical Value of Literal
Allusions — Guiding Principles of Judgment— Review of Patristic
Citation — Its Formulas and Forms similar in Earlier and Later
Fathers, but Progressive — A Parallel in Nomenclature of Gospels
— Citation from Memory — Scarcity of Copies of Scriptures —
Patristic Interpretation similar to New Testament Principles —
Difference — Allegory, Causes, and Results — Parallelism between
Fathers and New Testament in respect of Doubtful Cita
tions, ........ 75
SECTION FOURTH.
Ecclesiastical Citation — Table of Reference — Vulgate Cited — Pro
gress towards more Exact Citation — Regulating Principles —
Aquinas — A Kempis — Calvin — Bacon — Owen — Grotius — Butler
—Rutherford, . . . . . . .83

CONTENTS. IX

SECTION FIFTH. PAGB
Classical Quotation — Citations of Philosophers from Classics the
Connecting Link — Similar Formulas and Forms as elsewhere —
Bacon — Quintilian — Analogy of "Written Citation and Written
Reporting — Agreement and Difference — Diversity in Reports of
same things in Old and New Testaments, and in Josephus and
Classical Historians, . . . . . .87

PART IV.
ilmbitaiimt at (^notation.
SECTION FIRST.
Recapitulation of Principles and Results — Septuagint preferred in
Citation — Reason why — Looser Forms not due merely to Cita
tion from Memory, nor reconcilable with Hebrew on Basis of
Various Readings — To be determined by Facts of General Cita
tion — Conditions of Problem — Status questionis — Literal Quo
tation the Normal Form — Primary Object of all Citation to
reproduce Sense of Text — Freer Forms compatible with this
Object — Observed by Ecclesiastical and Classical Writers —
Founded on Reason and Expediency — Objections contrary to
Analogy and Self-contradictory — Reason of alternate Use and
Disuse of Septuagint — Validity of General Principles of Quota
tion a Presumptive Proof of its Accuracy — Difficulties and Dis
crepancies to be expected — Modes of Solution, . . .92
SECTION SECOND.
Principles of Interpretation — Relation of Forms of Quotation and
Principles of Interpretation — Old Testament Rationally Written
and to be Rationally Interpreted — Psychological and Grammatical

C CONTENTS. PAGE
Principles Vindicated — An Author's Stand-point to be Considered
— All Texts, Literal and Tropical, to be Grammatically Interpreted
— Extremes of Literalism and Allegory — Their Ecclesiastical His
tory — Mutual Relation and Definition of Metaphor, Synecdoche,
Enigma, Analogy, Allegory, Parable, Proverb, and Type — A
Common Basis of Similitude — Analogy defended on Logical
Grounds — Definition of Type — Its Basis, Elements, and highest
Form — Specific Difference between Symbol, Analogy, and Type
— Reason, Hypothetical Necessity and Suitableness of Type —
Connection with Plan and Progress of Revelation — Relation of
Type and Prophecy — General Characteristics of Prophecy —
Special Classes, Direct and Indirect Prophecy — Special Kinds,
Messianic and Non-Messianic — Vindication of Principles involved
— Mutual Relations of Divine Purpose, Prophecy, and Promise
— Key of Solution of Parallel Difficulties — Synthetic Interpreta
tion — Its Basis — Alternatives — Gnosticism, Rationalism, and
Anabaptist Views of Old Testament, .... 102

PART V.
^plication at ||rin:ri}jles.
SECTION FIRST.
Proof of External Unity of Canon— Evidence of Patristic Quotation
for Authenticity and Credibility of Old and New Testaments —
Argument Cumulative — Attacks on Gospels — Historical, Ration
alistic, Mythical Theories— Protevangelion Theory — Solution of
Similarity and Dissimilarity of Gospels — Full Force of Patristic
Argument — Argument from Citation of Epistles — Connection
between Authenticity, Credibility, and Inspiration — Reflex Argu
ment from Inspiration for Credibility — Proof of Plenary Verbal
Inspiration, ....... 130

CONTENTS. XI
PAGE
SECTION SECOND.
Internal Unity of Scripture — Two Covenants, Works and Grace
— Two Economies, Law and Gospel — Elements of Sinaitic
Covenant, Moral, Ceremonial, Civil — Dispensations Identified,
Historically, Morally, Prophetically, Exegetically, Doctrinally,
and Apologetically — Relation of Revelation and Dispensa
tion — Former the Law of Latter — Former remains when Latter
changes — Consequences of Confusion on Subject — Apologetic
Inferences from Unity of Dispensations — Author of Nature
the God of Providence — Gnosticism — Common Origin of Spiritual
Principles in Divine Nature — Progressive Development without
Increment of Absolutely New Truth — Morality and Religion of
Old and New Testament same in Kind, but different in Degree
— Historical and Doctrinal Proof of this Position — Decalogue,
its Character and Permanence — Identity of the Moral Law and
Decalogue — Vindication of Decalogue — Modern Attacks — Solu
tion of Difficulties — Conclusion, . . . . 142

LIST OF WOEKS
CONSULTED OR REFERRED TO IN THIS VOLUME.

Alfobd — Commentary on Greek New Testament.
A. Kempis — De Imitatione Christi.
Arnold, M. — Contemporary Review, 1875. Article I.
Aquinas, T. — Opera, Tom. Tertius.
Bacon — Essays, and Advancement of Learning.
Bestgelie Gnomon Nov. Test.
Baub, C. F. — Das Christenthum und Die Christliche Kirche, and Ten-
denz-Kritik.
Beck — Propad. Entwicklung, 242.
Brown, Dr. D. — Introduction to Four Gospels.
Butleb — Analogy of Religion.
Calvini in Nov. Test. Commentaria.
Calvin's Letters by Bonnet.
Campbell — Dissertations on Gospels.
Ciceeoms Epistolae, et Orationes.
Cbemeb — Lexicon of Greek New Testament.
Davidson, S. — Herm. Sac, and Introduction.
Diodati — Annotationes.
Eenesti — Principles of Biblical Interpretation.
Eusebius — Ecclesiastical History.
Faibbaibn — Hermeneutical Manual, and Typology.

xiv WORKS CONSULTED IN THIS VOLUME.
Grottos, H. — Defensio Christ. Religionis.
Gaussen — Inspiration of Scripture, and Canon of Scripture.
Hall, R.— Works, Vol. II.
Hug — Einleitung.
Hengstbnbekg — Christology, and Commentaries.
Hoeatius — Ars Poetica.
Josephds — Wars of Jews.
Klausen — Hermeneutik.
Lardner — Credibility of Gospel History.
Livil Titi Historiae. Lib. xxxix. 40.
Lee — Inspiration of Scriptures.
Miohaelis — Introductory Lectures to New Testament.
Marsh, Bishop — Lectures.
Mosheim — Ecclesiastical History.
Norton — Genuineness of Four Gospels.
Olshausen — Introduction, and Commentaries.
Patrum Apos. Opera. Hefele, 4to edition.
Pareau — Principles of Interpretation.
Peideaux — Old and New Testament Connected.
Quintilianus — Opera, Lib. viii. 9.
Review, British and Foreign, 1872, April and October. Articles I.
and VI.
Robinson — Greek and English Lexicon of New Testament.
Rainy — Cunningham Lectures.
Rudelbaoh — Zeitschrift.
Rosenmuller — Messianic Psalms.
Supernatural Religion, &c. Two Volumes, 1875.
Schleiebmacher's W'orks.
Stier, Rudolph — Words of Jesus.
Strauss — Leben Jesu.

WORKS CONSULTED IN THIS VOLUME. XV
Stuabt, M. — Commentary on Hebrews.
Septuagint Version.
Tuepie — Old Testament in New, and New Testament View of Old.
Tholuck— Das A. Test, in N. Test.
Trench — Synonyms, and On Miracles.
Ubebwig — History of Phil. Vol. I.
Vitringa — Observationes Sacros.
Vulgatse Biblia Sacra.
Webstee and Wilkinson — Greek New Testament.
Winer — Grammar of New Testament Diction.
Wnsius De Economia Foederum.

PRINCIPLES OF
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.

PAET I.

¦ FORMULAS OF QUOTATION.
Section First.
1. We must confine ourselves in this inquiry to the
formal and specific quotations made by our Lord and
His apostles, with a merely passing reference to the wide
but critically unimportant field of allusion. The
subject is acknowledged both by the friends and the
foes -of revelation to be as difficult as it is important,
and to be one of those problems of modern exegesis which
loudly call for solution. But biblical critics vary in
their estimates of the number of the books of the Old
Testament quoted in the New, and of both the cited
and the citation passages. There is more uncertainty
in regard to the latter than the former. Not more
than 2 5 of the 3 9 books of the Old Testament can be
said to be formally cited in the New. The passages
once quoted are 220, but the whole number of
repeated citations amounts to 290. Seventeen only of
the 27 books of the New Testament contain quotations B

18 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
from the Old. The single citations may be estimated
at 226, and their whole number by repetition at 284.
The difference in both cases between the quoted and
the quotation passages themselves, and between these
and one another, arises from repeated citation of
the same texts, and from the simultaneous quotation
of the substance of several similar passages, which
render the source of a particular citation the
more questionable. Were we to loosely reckon the
numerous references in the New Testament to the
Old, which are not valid for hermeneutical, and least
of all for apologetic purposes, the number of quota
tions would be more than trebled. The precise
number is doubtless interesting in itself and important
in connection with the value of certain passages, but
the solution of the problem of quotation mainly
depends on the character of the citations and the
principles which they involve. There is a sufficient
basis of clear and confessed quotations for the induc
tion of principles adequate to the solution of any ques
tion that is not insoluble. A proper combination of
analysis and synthesis, on a basis of reliable and
collated quotation, will lead the candid inquirer
through the winding maze.
Some critics have rashly alleged that these citations
are made solely from the Hebrew, others solely from
the Septuagint, while others maintain that they are
taken from neither exclusively, but from either alter
nately. But a careful examination will show that
there is a large class which, instead of being directly

FORMULAS OF QUOTATION. 19
drawn from either language, simply paraphrases the
substance of either or of both texts according to the
purpose of the writer.
In an uncritical age assumptions are made and
assertions hazarded which will not stand the test of
scientific criticism.
We find the following four forms or kinds of quota
tion : — One class coincides with the Hebrew literally or
substantially, a second with the Septuagint, a third
accords with both, which in this case tally with one
another, while a fourth formally agrees with neither,
whether they agree or differ. This classification,
which might be subdivided, is sufficient for exegetical
and apologetic purposes. We find that Home,
Gaussen, Fairbairn, and Turpie classify from different
stand-points, the first and last making five classes, the
third four, and the second three.
2. The various introductory formulas are of two
kinds, special and general, or definite and indefinite.
There is a class of generally acknowledged quota
tions which have no formal marks. They are known
to be such by a combination of collateral evidence,
such as their formal introduction in other places, the
authority with which they are advanced and applied in
the context, together with their substantial and some
times even their formal agreement with the original
texts. The writers or speakers manifestly assumed that
they would be recognised at once as true and trans
parent citations. They stand midway between allusions

20 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
and quotations, and exhibit within the domain of revela
tion the grand principle of gradation which prevails
throughout the three kingdoms of the material world.
These formulas may be reduced to three classes.
The first represents a thing as written in the Scriptures
generally, or in some particular place of Scripture.
The second declares a particular Scripture to be fulfilled
in a special way and for a special purpose. The third
affirms a thing to have been spoken by God Himself, or
by one of His servants — as Moses, David, or Isaiah —
either generally without stating where, or in some par
ticular Scripture. By the alternate or indiscriminate
use of the words, God, Moses, Scripture, and of the
past and present tenses, the particular saying becomes
identified with Scripture, and not with mere tradition.
The spoken word coincides with the written word,
where it lies embodied and embalmed. The word of
God endureth for ever, and the prophets, though dead,
are heard speaking to us.
We must here discriminate between the formal char
acter of New Testament citation and the character and
authority of particular quotations, such as those of
Satan and his allies, which may be correct in point of
form, but irrelevant in point of argument ; fairly
quoted, but falsely applied. The devil's citation from
the Psalms at the Temptation was not so much a mis
quotation as a misapplication of Scripture.* It may
be accepted as formally correct, but it must be rejected
as an interpretation of Scripture and a ground of duty
* Matt. iv. 6 ; Ps. xci. 11, 12.

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 21
in the circumstances. The word of God, like the
great Teacher Himself, when demons paid unwelcome
homage to His divinity and divine commission, neither
needs nor admits a declaration of its meaning or a
defence of its truth from the mouths of adversaries.
The general citation from Moses, advanced by the
Jewish Sadducees as a crucial test of the disputed
question of the resurrection, is substantially correct ;
but though it bears witness to the authenticity of the
Pentateuch, it is not an authoritative application, and,
therefore, does not belong to the class of texts which
are said to conflict with the inspiration of the Scrip
tures.* All such instances proclaim the Jewish
national belief in the authority of the Old Testament ;
but even though they were wholly informal and irre
levant, they would not invalidate the authority of the
New, because their authors neither possessed nor
claimed any inspiration. Consequently, all objections
taken to the truth of Scripture must be urged against
the authoritative quotations of Christ and His apos
tles, or inspired and accredited agents.
Section Second.
We proceed from the quotation formulas to the
forms themselves, between which there appears to be
no special and significant connection. The character
of the formula does not determine either the source
or the character of the citation, whether from the
Hebrew or from the Greek, and whether loose or
* Matt. xxii. 24 ; Deut. xxv. 5.

22 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
literal. The same formula is not always prefixed to
the same form of repeated citation. The same passage
is quoted in the same words in different places under
different formulas. And yet it were unreasonable to con
clude that they are employed indiscriminately. They
appear to be chosen out of three correlative consider
ations, the formal character of the context into which
the cited text was to be woven, the mental attitude of
the two classes of readers primarily addressed, whether
believing Jews or unbelieving Gentiles, and the purpose
of the writer, whether didactic or demonstrative.
When we come to investigate formal principles we
find that several critics have carefully examined the
agreement or disagreement of the various quotations
with their linguistic sources, but they have not classi
fied their specific forms and determined their regulative
principles. There may be ample room for diversity
of judgment regarding the formal character of some
of them, and the special category to which they
belong, but they are in general sufficiently definite for
classification and the enunciation of formal principles,
which when clearly determined at once explain the
forms of citation and make them capable of formal
vindication. We annex to the several classes a variety
of instances in support of the principles involved, which
we cannot examine and vindicate in detail without
instituting comparisons which any scholarly student can
make for himself, and which he will find already made
by biblical critics who have cultivated this particular
section of the field. Some of these citations are so

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 23
similar, and apparently so conjoint, that their specific
difference and the class to which they are referrible
may be doubtful, but if they be carefully collected
and considered, an ample basis of distinctive principles
will remain. These forms, involving as many prin
ciples, may be reduced to five classes, which we
describe in order, beginning with the more distinct
and advancing to the more obscure. They may be
even still further generalised, and classed as literal and
as loose quotations. Neither of these two forms, if
any of all the five following, is new and unprecedented.
Both modes at least are followed by the Old Testament
authors in quoting from each other.
We adduce under the several classes a few appro
priate instances, the logical value of which we shall
estimate at the proper place.
1. Literal or verbal quotation. It is not necessary
here to inquire or to determine why the writers
both of the Old and New Testaments so seldom cite
each other's writings. This is neither so easy nor
so interesting as the question why the latter so
frequently cite the former in proof or in illustration
of their teaching. Yet amongst the few internal
citations found in both revelations we meet with the
same principles. We find the prophet Jeremiah in a
notable passage formally quoting the prophet Micah
literally.* This circumstance, whether it be a mere
reference or a regular citation, at once partly occasions
* Jer. xxvi. 18 ; Micah iii. 12.

24 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
and partly solves an enigma in the New Testament,
according to which the words of one author are
ascribed to another, of the secondary writer to the
primary, even when the former is specially referred to
or directly quoted. Thus Matthew ascribes the words
of Zechariah regarding the formative art of the potter
to Jeremiah, who first employed them in a very
mystical manner, and who sustained the same relation
to the minor prophet as Ezekiel and Daniel did to the
Apocalypse.* An examination of the whole number of citations
in the New Testament from the Old shows that not
less than a fourth part is taken verbally from the
Hebrew or from the Greek, the latter of which is
more frequently quoted than the former.f The Hebrew
is literally translated into Greek, and the Septuagint
is verbally cited when it renders the Hebrew loosely
*¦ Matt, xxvii. 9 ; Zech. xi. 13 ; Jer. xviii. 1-3, and xix. 2.
+ Hebrew— Matt. xix. 18, 19 ; Matt. xxi. 16 ; Matt. xxii. 39 ; Mark
vii. 10 ; Mark xi. 17 ; Mark xii. 31 ; Luke x. 27 ; Luke xviii. 20 ; John
x. 34 ; John xix. 24 ; Acts i. 20; Acts ii. 34, 35 ; Acts iv. 25, 26 ; Acts
xiii. 33, 35; Rom. iii. 13; Rom. iv. 17, 18; Rom. viii. 36; Rom. ix. 7,
12, 15 ; Rom. x. 13 ; Rom. xiii. 9 ; Rom. xv. 3 ; 1 Cor. x. 7, 26 ;' 2 Cor.
iv. 13; 2 Cor. vi. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 9; Gal. iii. 16'; Gal. v. 14; Heb. i
5, 8, 9, 13 ; Heb. iii. 15 ; Heb. iv. 3, 7 ; Heb. v. 5, 6 ; Heb. vii. 17-21 ;
Heb. xi. 18 ; James ii. 8, &c. Greek — Matt. iv. 7 ; Matt. xiii.
14, 15 ; Luke iv._ 12 ; Acts ii. 25-28 ; Acts viii. 32, 33 ; Acts xxviii.
26, 27 ; Rom. vii. 8 ; Rom. x. 18 ; 1 Cor. ix. 9 ; 1 Cor. xv. 32 ; Gal.
iv. 27 ; Matt. xxi. 41 ; Mark xii. 10, 11 ; Luke xx. 17 ; John xii. 38 ;
Rom. x. 16 ; Rom. xii. 20 ; Rom. xv. 10, 21 ; 1 Cor. vi. 16 ; Rom.
xv. 12; Rom. xi. 21, 34; Heb. ii. 13; Heb. x. 37, 38; Heb. ii.
6-8 ; Heb. x. 5, 7 ; Gal. iii. 16 ; Rom. x. 20, 21 ; Rom. xii. 20 ; Rom.
xv. 10, 21 ; Heb. xiii. 6 ; 1 Peter ii. 7 ; Heb. x. 5-7 ; Rom. iv. 3 ; Rom.
ix. 29 ; James ii. 23 ; James iv. 5, &c.

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 25
as well as literally. Verbal citation is evidently the
normal form, in connection with which no formal
textual difficulties can arise. Such questions as why
the Greek version is so frequently preferred to the
Hebrew text, even when it differs from it, belong to
a subsequent stage of this inquiry.
2. Substantial quotation. Here also the authors
of the Old Testament anticipated the writers of the
New, in occasionally embodying the substance of each
other's writings.* We find that the substance of the
words, and the sense of the passage quoted, have con
jointly determined the form of the quotation. The
words are changed to suit the new subject, and the
form is adapted to the writer's text. This is effected
both by abbreviation and by augmentation of the
primary text, by occasional transposition of words, or
of whole clauses, and by a change of persons and of
tenses to suit not merely the author's context, but
the altered circumstances and the higher form of the
new evangelical economy.f The preliminary revela
tion, which was the law of the dispensation, is still
furthur developed and adapted to the higher character
* Obadiah i. 4, and Jer. xlix. 7-22 ; Tsa. xi. 9, and Hab. ii. 14 ; Isa.
xiii. 9-22, and Jer.X 39, 40 ; Exod. xv. 2, and Isa. xii. 2 ; Isa. Iii. 7, and
Nahum i. 15; Isa. xlvii. 8, and Zeph. ii. 15 ; Isa. ii. 2-4, and Micah
iv. 1-3.
t Matt. i. 23 ; Matt. iv. 15, 16 ; Matt. xi. 10 ; Matt, xxvii. 9, 10;
Mark iv. 12 ; Mark x. 6 ; John xii. 18 ; John vi. 45 ; Rom. iii. 15, 17 ;
Rom. ix. 33 ; Rom. xi. 34 ; Rom. xi. 26, 27 ; Rom. ix. 27, 28 ; Rom. iii.
11, 12; Rom. x. 15; Rom. xiv. 11; 1 Cor. i. 19, 31 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9; 1 Cor.
x. 20 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 21 ; 1 Cor. xv. 56 ; 2 Cor. vi. 17 ; Rom. ix. 25 ; Gal. iv.
30 ; Heb. x. 37, 38 ; Heb. xi. 20, 21 ; 1 Peter ii. 6 ; 1 Peter xxiv. 25-

2 b' PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
and requirements of the new manifestation of grace
and truth. This was the result not of vague and
uncertain citation from memory, nor even of the
conscious freedom and security of a guiding inspira
tion, but of the unity and progressive development of
revelation and the special purpose of the writers.
3. Analytic or eclectic quotation. In this case the
cited text was mentally analysed, and the part of it
most appropriate to the subject or the* object of the
writer was selected. * He cited merely what was strictly
relevant, as the best writers, both Pagan and Christian,
do in similar circumstances. Nothing can tend more
to encumber a writer's text or to overlay and hide his
meaning than an array of cumbrous and indefinite
citations. The sacred writers also presumed on the
religious knowledge and spiritual discernment of their
readers, to whom as wise men even a word would
be sufficient to recall and identify the cited Scripture.
And they manifestly regarded a pointed and well put
quotation, based on subjective analysis, as more ex
pressive than emphasised pronunciation, or the modern
device of citation marks, or of an italicised text. It
may be either literal or general, the exact copy or the
general form and substance of the original text, but in
either case it is regulated by the eclectic principle.
Thus John selects from a long passage of Zechariah
the very words, and nothing more, that suit his pur-
* Matt, ii 5 ; Mark iv. 12 ; Luke iv. 4 ; John xii. 14, 15 ; John xix.
37; Rom. x. 15; Rom. x. 11'; 1 Cor. ii. 16 ; Gal. iii. 16.

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 27
pose, " And they shall look on Him whom they have
pierced," merely changing the first personal pronotin
into the third, to adapt it to his own stand-point, and
to the historical fulfilment of the prophecy.* This
form was evidently chosen in preference to more prolix
citation, because it was more suitable to the presenta
tion of the truth, as well as to the purpose of the
author, and more complimentary to the intelligence of
his readers.
4. Synthetic or combined quotation. This appears
under two forms, collective and combined citation.
A series of passages is either adduced and linked to
gether in proof of a particular proposition, as in the
third chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, or they
are blended together, and the substance of the whole
is synthetically quoted.f The former is merely the
initial form of the latter, which thus presents a synop
tical view of the substance of several homogeneous and
correlative passages, all referring to the same subject,
like the whole series of similar events comprehended
in a single prophecy. A combination of heterogeneous
texts, never attempted by the sacred writers, were as
great an anomaly as the reduction of dissimilar events
to the same prophetic formula. This mode is also
found in the Old Testament, where citation and even
allusion are comparatively rare. Thus Nahum alludes
to the words of Isaiah, while Jeremiah manifestly
* John xix. 37 ; Zech. xii. 10.
+ Rom. iii 10-18, and Ps. liii. 1 ; Ps. v. 9 ; Ps. cxl. 3 ; Ps. x. 7 ;
Isa. lix. 7, 8.

28 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
combines the statements of both in one.* It is speci
ally characteristic of the latter author to refer fre
quently to the earlier writings of the Old Testament,
and to blend into one two, or niore passages, moulded
or modified according to his purpose. f The New
Testament is full of such quotation, which forms a
most interesting biblical study, and completely ex
plains why the major prophet is preferred to the
minor, and the primary author is named even when
the secondary writer is more directly cited.J By
combining the sense of several passages, instead of
being a free use of a particular text, it involves the im
portant principle of the continuity of revelation. The
more carefully such passages are compared and examined
the more clearly is their combination seen, and the
unity in diversity of the divine economy displayed.S
5. Idealistic or paraphrastic quotation. These are
merely manifestations of the same principle, different
aspects of the same thing. It is idealistic in reference
to the internal sense of the text cited, and paraphrastic
in regard to its objective expression or embodiment.
' Nahum i. 13 ; Isa. x. 27 ; Jer. xxx. 8.
f Jer. xlviii. 45 ; Nahum xxi. 28, 29; Num. xxiv. 17.
t Matt, xxvii. 9, 10 ; Zech. xi. 13 ; Jer. xix. 2, 10, 11 ; Jer. xviii. 2 ;
Mark i. 1, 2 ; Mai. iii. 1 ; Isa. xl. 3.
§ Matt. xxi. 5, Zech. ix. 9, and Isa. xl. 3. Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, Zech.
xi. 13, and Jer. xix. 2, 10, 11. Mark i. 2, 3, Mai. iii. 1, and Isa. xl. 3.
John vii. 38, Isa. xliv. 3, and Isa. Iv. 1, Isa. lviii. 11. Acts vii. 7, Gen.
xv. 14, and Exod. iii. 12. Acts iii. 25, Gen. xxii. 18, and Gen. xii. 3. Acts
xiii. 22. Ps.lxxxix. 21, and 1 Sam. xiii. 14. Rom. ix. 33, Isa. xxviii. 16, '
Isa. viii. 14. Rom. xi. 8, Deut. xxix. 3, 4. 2 Cor. vi. 18, 2 Sam. vii.
8, 14. 2 Cor. vi. 16, Lev. xxvi. 11, 12, Ezek. xxxvii. 27.

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 29
The writer fixed his eye on the psychology of the
text, and seized the underlying idea, which he expressed
in a paraphrase.* The sense or idea of the text and
not its form was caught and presented under another
body or form. It was also still further generalised
and presented in a form wholly new. So far, there
fore, it agrees with substantial citation, and so far it
differs from it. It gives the substance of the sense,
without the substance of the form, and in a more
idealistic and less formal manner. The mental action
or process of the writer involved four things — an
analysis of the text, abstraction of the sense from the
form, generalisation of the internal idea, and a corres
ponding objective expression. It is, therefore, as real
though not so palpable as any of the other forms
already adduced. The idealisation of a single passage,
or the generalisation of several, ought to be regarded
as valid citation, admirably adapted to a concise and
complete presentation of the truth, and furnishing a
kind of philosophy of revelation. Matthew generalises
the ancient prophetic conception of Messiah as lowly
and despised, and embodies it in a single opprobrious
epithet, borrowed from the usage of enemies, " He
shall be called a Nazarene."t And John not only
idealises the living water of ancient prophecy as a
* Matt, ii 23, with Isa. xi. 1, and Isa. liii. 3. Matt. x. 10, Luke x. 7,
1 Cor. ix. 9, 1 Tim. v. 18, with Lev. xix. 13, Deut. xxv. 14, 15. James
iv. 5, Ezek. xxiii. 25, and Prov. xxi. 10. John vii. 38, Isa. xliii. 3, Isa.
Ii. 1, Isa. lviii. 11. John vii. 42, with 2 Sam. vii. 11-13, Mai. v. 1, 1 Sam.
xvi 1-13. Eph. v. 14, Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20.
t Matt. ii. 23 ; Isa. liii. 2-4.

30 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
symbol of grace, but generalises it to signify the Spirit
of life Himself, the source and sum of all gracious
influence.* These five forms of quotation, even when they run
into one another, yet retain their specific differences
by which they may be severally discriminated. They
are recognised by carrying on their forefront notation
marks, by containing sometimes the very body of the
passage cited, sometimes merely the semblance of its
form, but always its significance. f
Such passages as are justly regarded as quotations,
though they want the formula, occupy an intermediate
place between formal citation- and mere allusion, with
the latter of which we close our examination of the
forms of quotation.
Allusion is of two kinds, to the sense and to the
mere sound or form of Scripture. They either represent
the former, or formally reproduce the latter. They are
a silent appropriation of the facts and forms of thought,
of the sentiments and sentences of the Old Testament,
and, even more than the different modes of citation,
pervade the whole revelation. They are the natural
outcome of memories saturated with divine truth, and
of imaginations laden with Scripture imagery. They
strew the whole field of revelation in countless numbers. J
* John vii. 37, 39 ; Isa. Iv. 1. Also, John ii. 22 ; John xx. 9 ; John
vii. 42 ; Mark xii. 30, 31 ; 1 Cor. xv. 4.
t Matt, xxvii. 46 ; Mark iv. 12 ; Luke x. 7 ; 1 Peter iv. 8.
J Luke i. 17, 37, 46, 47, 76, 78 ; Rom. x. 8 ; 1 Cor. x. 8, 9, 10 ;
2 Cor. ix. 7, 10 ; James v. 11, 12, 20 ; 1 Peter ii. 9, 22, 24 ; 1 Peter
iii. 10, 14, 15 ; Heb. x. 37, 38 ; Heb. ii. 21, &c.

FORMS OF QUOTATION. 31
They must not be confounded with quotations,
and thereby allowed to cumber and complicate the
problem to be solved. We must carefully distinguish
between their respective characters and value. They
are sometimes identified by popular writers, and even
professional critics are not always careful to discrimi
nate between them. This circumstance has set in
motion the pens of the enemies of inspiration. It is a
relic of the inconsiderate assumptions of an uncritical
age, which modern science has chased away.

PART II.
PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION.
Section First.
The forms of quotation and their interpretation are
two interdependent parts of the same problem. The
conception of the writer determined the form, which
embodies and reveals the principle on which it is made.
They ought to be discussed and vindicated in their
correlation as distinct but connected questions. And
as the spirit of revelation is paramount to the mere
letter, so are the hermeneutics of quotation to its form.
We are here restricted to .a discussion of the parti
cular principles on which the writers proceeded in
quotation, which, so far as they are applicable, are sub
stantially the principles of all biblical interpretation.
1. It is evident that the fundamental principle is
the psychological. It is not only the proper stand
point, but the general condition of all interpretation.
The thought of the writer, duly ascertained, is as
consciousness to cognition. Our prospect depends
upon our stand-point, just as the type is the view-point
of the antitype. The writers of the New Testament,
accordingly, in quoting the authors of the Old, put

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 33
themselves into their position, investigated their
thoughts, and developed the connection and bearing of
the comprehensive and holy revelations of the Spirit of
Christ. From this point of view they surveyed and
contemplated the diversified landscape of the whole
ancient revelation of grace and truth.*
2. The grammatical or philological principle. It
embraces and covers both the literal and the tropical
text of Scripture. Most passages are literally cited,
but all are grammatically interpreted.! No construction
is ever put upon a text which is not either expressed
or implied in the language quoted. Literal and
tropical passages are alike grammatically interpreted.
The difference between them lies in themselves and not in
their principle of interpretation. This is evident from
the definition of the terms. Language is literal when
the same words uniformly represent the same things
or thoughts, which are thus spontaneously presented
to the mind as soon as the word is seen or heard. It
is figurative when words become conventionally the
signs of other things or thoughts than those of which
they are the natural or ordinary symbols. This im
plies as its basis that natural things themselves, of
which words are the signs, are made the symbols of
spiritual thoughts or things. The theory of all forms
of language may be summed up in a single syllogistic
formula — words are the signs of things, things are
* Rom. ix. passim; Rom. xi. 26, 27 ; John vii. 38, 42 ; Eph. v. 14.
t Matt. iv. 4, 6, 7, 10 ; Matt. xxii. 31 ; John xix. 36, 37 ; Gal.
iii. 16 ; Heb. i. 5, &c. C

34 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
made the signs of thoughts, therefore words are the
signs of thoughts. Accordingly, the text of the ancient
Scripture, whether literal or figurative, was grammati
cally interpreted, as is done now by all true critics.
The evangelical writers acknowledged a double refer
ence, based on the relation between natural and
spiritual things, but not a double or divided sense
which did not lie in the language. They regarded the
sense of Scripture as one, and, therefore, to be inter
preted philologically, whether the words were literal
or figurative. They carefully avoided the rock of
literalism on the one hand, and the whirlpool of
mysticism on the other. They did not, like Cocceius,
find Christ everywhere, nor, like Grotius, nowhere.
They read the language of the ancient Scripture in
the light of usage as well as in the light of inspiration,
and not in the light of things, such as preconceived
opinions, or the principles of the Rabbinical or the
Pagan schools. They did not interpret by the prin
ciples of philosophy a revelation which came from God
and not from human reason. They understood the
use and the abuse of reason in the interpretation of the
divine word, of which some of the early Fathers, their
successors, were profoundly ignorant. We find nothing
in their exegesis akin to the fanciful allegories of Bar
nabas, or the manifold senses of Origen, or the plastic
symbolism of Ammonius Saccas, who laboured to har
monise all the systems both of philosophy and of reli
gion not only with themselves, but with each other.
There is no trace of the Neoplatonism of Philo and

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 35
Josephus and of the Rabbinical literature after the
close of the Canon and during the prevalence of the
Oriental and Alexandrian philosophies. We meet with
no cabalistic interpretation or science of the hidden
sense. The following testing instances may be for
mally Judaical, but they are philologically correct.
Paul interprets the Abrahamic covenant negatively and
positively, and applies the promise to Christ* — " He
sayeth not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as of one,
And to thy seed, which is Christ." The word for seed
in the Old Testament is in several instances — as Seth,t
Samuel,J and Solomon§ — individual, though generally
collective. And though it did not directly signify
individuality in the context of the promise, it might
connote or involve it in all the circumstances of the
case, which embraced the whole chosen seed and Christ,
the seed of Abraham and of Adam. The Abrahamic
covenant was essentially a revelation of the covenant
of grace, " confirmed of God in Christ," with whom it
was primarily made, as the second contracting party
and prospective fulfiller, and merely secondarily made
with Abraham. Consequently, the chosen seed from
the beginning derived their whole federal standing,
character, and destiny from Christ as their Surety or
Head. The words of promise expressed plurality
rather than individuality, yet they connoted unity,
or many in one, the members in the Head. And
still more specifically, the context also, in which
* GaL iii. 16 ; Gen. xvii. 6-8. t Gen. iv. 25 ; Gen. xxi. 13.
J 1 Sam. i 11. D'TON JTlf, a male child or a seed of men.
§ 1 Chron. xxii. 10 ; Ps. lxx'xix. 26 ; 2 Sam. vii. 12-14.

36 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
the promise sits, and in the light of which it must
be read, expressly singles out and signalises one
individual, one family, and one class of spiritual char
acter, as destined to culminate in one Person, whom
both Abraham and Moses knew to be the seed of pro
mise, the grand personage by whom the elect seed
would realise their destiny. And hence both kinds of
unity, which involve one another, are thus grammati
cally interpreted and summed up in the aptest terms —
" He saith not, And to seeds, as of many ; but as of
one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."* He speaks
not of seeds as of several individuals, or of several sorts
of seed, which He would have done had He meant both
Ishmael and Isaac and their families, but He speaks
as of one, Isaac and his posterity, both genealogically
and spiritually, which is Christ collectively or Christ
in the Church. In like manner the Great Teacher,
when accused of blasphemy in calling Himself the Son
of God, rejoined by an argument drawn from the very
words of Scripture, and involving both a comparison
and a contrast. He thus reasons analogically — If the
Scripture calls human judges or magistrates, to whom
the word of God merely came, gods, or God officially,
how can I, the Sent of God, be called a blasphemer,
simply because I call myself the Son of God ? And
then, reasoning from the less to the greater, and con
trasting them with Himself, He says — If earth-born
and earthly judges be called gods, much more am I,
who have been set apart by the Father and sent into
* 1 Sam. viii. 15, tJ^JTIf . Mark iv. 31, sa-s^a™. Matt. xiii. 31, 32.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 37
the world as the Word of God, His primary and per
sonal Revealer, entitled to be called the Son of God,
very God of very God.*
3. The synthetic or unitive principle of interpre
tation. It is synthetic because it gives the combined
sense of several passages, and unitive because it tends
to that unity which is the end of all philosophy and
of all theology. It is based on two things, the pro
gressive development of revelation and the unity of
the economies. These general principles of revelation
underlie all principles of interpretation, and especially
the synthetic and prophetic. And this objective unity
of revealed truth involves a corresponding subjective
unity of conception in the Revealer and in the writer
of the revelation. These two things are correlative,
the one being the counterpart of the other. All the
works of God are known to Him from the beginning,
so that there can be no progress of the divine intelli
gence, but subjective unity of purpose must be regarded
as real and as relative to its objective embodiment.
Hence the New Testament interpreters, in declaring
the conjunct sense of Scripture, were regulated by
these general principles, and recognised it as one
whole — ab imo ad summum simplex et unum. Judaism
was to them rudimentary or initial Christianity, and
the whole Old Testament merely a prophecy of the
New. They read the ancient Scriptures in the light
of the new economy as well as in their own light —
* John x. 34-36 ; Ps. Ixxxii. 1, 6.

38 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
in a double blended light, which radiated all around
and chased away the shadows of the night. And
hence also any germinal or undeveloped truth of the
old revelation is called that truth, as subsequently
developed, not by synecdoche or any other linguistic
figure, but in its formal appearance and position in
the ecclesiastical heavens. The partial appearance
and apparent magnitude of any truth are declared to
be that truth, rising higher and higher in the sky
unto the perfect day, but not the perfect truth. Here
we find natural analogues in abundance. When we
see one exposed side or dimension of a buried rock,
we recognise or infer a corresponding underlying basis
or whole. A single exposed fragment of rock may
reveal the character of the range of which it forms a
part. A range of the same mountain granite suggests
the unity of a common basis. A single phase of the
moon is called the moon, because it implies the whole.
This principle is analogous to that in comparative
anatomy, whereby from a few fragments of bone or
fossil the physiologist can construct a skeleton and
conclude a species or a genus.
4. The analogical principle. Analogy is a recog
nised though variously estimated principle of applied
logic. It implies at once the objective unity of reve
lation and the harmony of truth, and, consequently, of
thought. Accordingly, we have legal and grammatical,
philosophical and physical, moral and theological ana
logy. It is not a mere resemblance between things, 'as

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 39
between a flower and frost-work on a window, where
there is a merely superficial and seeming sameness of
structure. It is a radical and real agreement of prin
ciple or internal character between things or thoughts,
as between the organic forms of different human
bodies, or the primary forms of thought of different
minds. This involves corresponding logical relations
which are the basis of analogical reasoning or com
parative logic* A popular theologian, misconceiving
the value of analogy as applied to theology, has de
nounced it as a factitious and assumptive test of a
text or truth. But a greater theologian has applied
it with irresistible force to the defence of natural and
revealed religion. It has both a negative and a
positive value, disproving error while it establishes
truth. It is a valid but not the strongest form of the
theistic argument, according to which we may legiti
mately reason from design in the works of man to
design in the adaptations of the external world. It
may be applied within its proper sphere to the prin
cipal truths of revealed as well as of natural religion.
The scriptural expression, analogy or " proportion of
faith," directly denotes the subjective faith of the
individual, but it also implies in the correlation of
subject and object the harmony of objective faith, or
the proportion of the parts of truth, in accordance with
its etymological, classical, and ecclesiastical signi-
ficahce.f As a hermeneutical principle of Scripture,
* Heb. xii. 3— atn^nyirxirh rii 'lniriiilv, for the purpose of comparison.
'Y Rom. xii. 6 — 'asvaXay/a ryis tfitTTiws.

40 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
it appears under three forms — facts, principles, and
doctrines — which are all mutually related and inter
dependent. (1.) These facts are the basis of the moral principles
exhibited and of the formal doctrines enunciated.
The events appealed to are always parallel to the
circumstances of the writer, and accordingly when they
repeat themselves, and are repeatedly cited, it is in
similar circumstances or under the same conditions.
This is equally true of the spiritual principles and
formal doctrines evolved, which are merely the philo
sophy or theology of the facts'. The circumstances
associated with the cited passage and the citation itself,
and all the concomitant truths and principles involved,
are throughout parallel and homogeneous. These
forms of analogy may occasionally run into each other
and be commingled in any quotation, especially the
facts and doctrines, but their distinctive characters
are seen in the interpretation given and the appli
cation made. Generally, however, they may be
clearly distinguished and severally exemplified. Thus,
Paul accused the unbelieving Jews of his age of
blaspheming God before the heathen on the principle
of historical analogy.* Between the circumstances
and sins of the Jews in the days of the prophets and
of Paul there was a close and complete historical
parallel. Both alike in similar circumstances pro
faned or aspersed God's holy name in the sight of the
heathen. We find him elsewhere citing historical
* Rom. ii. 24 ; Isa. Hi. 5. See also 2 Cor. viii. 15 ; Rom. xi. 3-5.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 41
facts in the life of ancient Israel as types or pro
spective signs, that the same sins in similar circum
stances would meet with the same punishment.* So
close, indeed, is the correspondence between the cir
cumstances and specially the sufferings of ancient
Israel and of the early Christian Church, that we may
read the history of the one in that of the other.t
Frequently an event, instead of standing by itself,
appears wrapt up in a prophecy or historical pro
gramme of the future, founded on the analogy of facts.
The prophet Jeremiah's vivid picture of Rachel, the
ancestral mother of a captive band, weeping for her
lost children, is interpreted as being fulfilled or filled
up in the massacre of the infants of Bethlehem and
the mourning of the miserable mothers. Between
these two events there are points of difference -as well
as of agreement, and accordingly the one is represented
as accomplished in the other on the principle of his
torical parallel rather than of prophetic anticipation,
" Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by the
prophet Jeremiah." J In a similar instance our Lord
is said to have spoken in parables that He might
fulfil a special function of the prophetic office, ex
ercised in the revelation of truth in symbol, rather
than the prophet's representation of a series of under
lying parallel and prophetic circumstances between
Israel present and prospective. § It becomes evident
that historical analogy is simply history repeating or
* 1 Cor. x. 7-11. + Heb. xi. 36-38.
% Matt. ii. 18 ; Jer. xxxi 15. § Matt. xiii. 35; Ps. Ixxfviii 2, &c.

42 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
reproducing itself, and becoming the basis of analogical
interpretation. (2.) The analogy of principles refers to the moral
principles of the divine character and government and
of human nature, which are correlate and combined in
any instance or event. The analogy of the divine
dispensations implies similar or the same human
character and circumstances. The same divine and
human principles in operation become the basis of,
the analogy of the divine dealings in the moral world,
according to which God treats men in the same way
under the same conditions of character and circum
stances. Moral analogy, therefore, implies the divine
immutability and the moral identity of human nature,
which are constituent elements of the divine action,
according to which it is impossible for God to err.
And, accordingly, as a principle of interpretation, it is
the solvent of many quotations, the key which lays
open the moral world from stem to stern.* Thus,
Paul interprets and applies to the adequate mainten
ance of the Christian ministry the principle of a com
mandment of Moses in regard to the feeding of working
oxen.f Elsewhere he declares a special principle of
Hoshea in regard to the life of faith to be a general
principle or condition of the higher spiritual life,
* Matt. xxi. 16; Matt. xv. 8; Luke xviii. 20; John viii. 17; Rom.
i. 17; Rom. iii. 4; Rom.xi. 9, 10; 1 Cor. ix. 9; 2 Cor. vi. 2, 16, 17, 18 ;
2 Tim. ii. 19 ; 1 Tim. v. 18 ; Acts xiii. 41 ; Heb. ii. 6-8 ; Heb. x. 15 ;
Heb. xiii. 5, 6; Heb. a. 5-11; Heb. xii. 5, 6; John ii. 17; Rom. viii.
36 ; Rom. xv. 3.
T 1 Cor. ix. 9; Deut. xxv. 4.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 43
which is always gained and sustained by faith in the
divine revelation of grace.* Our Lord, in like manner,
intrepreted a special oracle of Isaiah against the hypo
critical and heartless formalists of his age, as involving
a principle of universal application under the same
moral conditions, t The application, also, of a singular
passage from a signal psalm to the jubilant shout of the
children in the temple in honour of Messiah's name,
appears to be made not in fulfilment of a special
prophecy, but in verification of the principle, founded on
some known analogous instances, that the foolish things
of the world are used to confound the wise, to stop
the mouths and stifle the rage of envious enemies. J
The long and elaborate quotation from a Messianic
psalm, applied by Paul to the person and work of
Christ, involves the important principle that willing
obedience to the divine will is better than mere
sacrifice. § This principle was applied by the Lord on
two several occasions to vindicate before the captious
Pharisees both His own observance of the Sabbath
and His intercourse with publicans and sinners, " I
will have mercy and not sacrifice." | So also Paul,
in declaring the ministerial destiny of man under the
Mediator, adduces the fact of his primal dignity and
dominion as lord of creation and prime minister of
God, of which the shadow only now remains, and
* Rom. i. 17; Gal. iii. 11 ; Heb. x. 38.
t.Matt. xv. 8 ; Isa. xxix. 13.
+ Matt. xxi. 16 ; Ps. viii. 3. § Heb. x. 5-8 ; Ps. xl. 6-8.
|| Matt. ix. 13 ; Matt. xii. 7 ; Hosea vi. 7, 8.

44 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
argues that when taken in connection with the promise
of grace and the redemptive work of the representative
Man, it involves the principle of man's restoration
and realisation of his destiny.* He also cites a psalm
in which Jehovah, as idol-breaker of the world-power
of Assyria, claims the worship of the heavenly hosts,
and thence evolves the principle that the Son of God,
the destroyer at His several advents of the works of
the world-god, deserved and obtained the same hom
age, f He reasons throughout the whole of the first
chapter that the Son is not only superior to angels,
but God of very God, because the same divine titles,
worship, and works are ascribed to Him in Scripture,
the exact method of proof followed by modern
theologians. (3.) Doctrinal analogy deals with doctrines which
are the philosophy of facts or of principles. Conse
quently, quotations adduced to declare or to defend a
particular doctrine must also wrap up an emergent
fact or principle of experience. The Old Testament is
the germ of the New, as the gospels are the germ of
the epistles, which are their full development. This
organic unity of the two economies is the foundation of
the doctrinal analogy which prevails throughout and
appears prominently in quotation, as some hills of the
same mountain range tower above the rest. The doc
trine contained is generally conspicuous, but it is
sometimes merely inferential, which renders its appli
cation less palpable. Paul, in the grand doctrinal
* Heb. ii. 6-8 ; Ps. viii. 4-6. f Heb. i. 6 ; Ps. xcvii. 7.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 45
Epistle to the Romans, demonstrates in order, by a
series of texts from the Old Testament, the sinful
ness of man ; justification in the sight of God by faith
alone without works;, the sovereignty of God in the
election of individuals and communities to grace as
well as to privileges ; the calling of the Gentiles ; and
the final judgment of the world.* At other times the
application of a citation is indirect and inferential.-
The same apostle inferred, from a passage in the
Psalms,- which does not appear to be Messianic, and in
which the writer declared that he would praise God
among the Gentiles, that they being privileged to hear
His glorious praise must be also partakers of His sal
vation by the gospel.f He also concludes, indirectly,
from a text which, whether taken from Isaiah or from
David, and even whether it be Messianic or not, admit
of doubt, that Christ and all believers are brethren on
the ground of a common faith which makes them all
children of one Father and of one family.^ He applied,
with some modification, a directly Messianic passage
from Isaiah indirectly to himself and Barnabas as a
special warrant to them, as the ministers or represen
tatives of Christ, to preach the gospel to the Gentiles,
according to the maxim of jurisprudence — " Qui facit
per alium facit per se."§ In the Epistle to the
Hebrews, which, in reference to quotation, may be
* Rom. i. 17 ; Rom. iv. 3 ; Rom. iii. 10-18 ; Rom. x. 5-11 ; Rom.
ix. 9, 12, 15, 25, 27, 29, 33 ; Rom. xi. 3, 5, 8 ; Rom. xiv. 11 ; Rom. x.
19, 20 ; Rom. xv. 9-12.
+ Rom. xv. 9 ; Ps. xviii. 49. Matt. xxii. 31, 32 ; Exod. iii. 6.
t Heb. ii. 13 ; Isa. viii. 17 ; Ps. xviii. 2.
§ Acts xiii. 47 ; Isa. xlix. 6.

46 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
called the cross of interpreters, he was addressing not
only Jews, but Christian Jews, who believed the Christ
to be the Son of God, identical with the Logos, the
delegated Maker of the worlds by His own power, and,
therefore, he applies indirectly to the Son a passage
which primarily applied to Jehovah, as , Creator and
covenant God of Israel. This interpretation is less
fetched and forced than to regard the psalm as Mes
sianic, presenting Jehovah as the Church's covenant
God in Christ, and thereby ascribing to the latter the
attributes of God, according to the analogy of ancient
Scripture and the faith of believing Israel."""
5. The prophetic or prospective principle we place
last, because it involves and combines less or more all
the others, psychology and philology, synthesis and
analogy. It appears under two forms, type and pro
phecy, which are both alike prognostic of the future.
They are radically connected as different forms of the
same thing, and mutually related as things and words,
which are the signs of things or thoughts. The type
may be defined generally as a divine idea or purpose
of something present or prospective, embodied in a
thing as its symbol. Defined specifically, as a figure
of things to come, it is a proleptic sign of the future,
expressive of a divine purpose or promise of something,
which is called the antitype. Typology is founded on
a system of divine ideas or intentions, whether em
bodied in a person, a place, an institution, or an event.
* Heb. i. 10, 12 ; Ps. cii. 25-27.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 47
It is biblical both in name and thing— a distinct form
of divine communication not to be confounded with
allegory and analogy, or with progressive revelation.
The Adamic and Abrahamic promises were both par
tial and proleptic revelations, but they were not formal
types, even though the former was conserved in primi
tive sacrifice, and the latter confirmed by the seal of
circumcision. The divine wisdom might have seen fit
to set up a series of types as mere signal-posts along
the long and winding route of revelation down to
Christ, but they were certainly of a more substantial
and significant nature. They were not factitious or
conventional things, like all language not strictly
onomatopoetic, but organic parts of revelation, being
as well as showing the thing, sample signs suggestive
of the whole truth. How far the primary authors of
Scripture realised the divine design of the type, so that
its divine and human elements coincided in their con
sciousness, is a fit question of criticism, but it is evi
dent that the New Testament interpreters dealt rather
with the divine than with the human idea. It is
evident that holy men of God, living in peculiar times,
must have realised a deeper meaning in their com
munications than rationalistic critics are willing to
admit, and that the evangelical writers in citing the
ancient types construe them rationally in the light of
the signal and significant facts of their institution, of
the germinant buds of the early promises which were
the hope of the Church, and of the development and
continuity of revelation. Modern apologists of inspira-

48 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
tion need not complicate the question of quotation by
insisting on more types than are expressly recognised
in Scripture. But while" we acknowledge generally an
underlying and sometimes an outstanding parallelism
between the two economies, we must also maintain
special points of distinct typical significance. The
following may be regarded as clear and confessed
examples. Adam, the covenant head of fallen human
ity, is declared to be a type of Christ, the representa
tive Head of redeemed humanity.* In their federal
capacity they are compared, but in the results they are
contrasted. The most natural interpretation of the
perplexed passage, in which Abraham is said to have
received back his son from imminent death in a figure,
is to regard the whole transaction, embracing the vir
tual death of Isaac and his restoration to his father by
the actual substitution of the ram, as a joint type of
the vicarious death and resurrection of Christ, whose
day the patriarch rejoiced to see.f
We are expressly told in the Epistle to the Hebrews,
which is a commentary on the ritualism of the law,
that the temple and the whole of its rites were types
or shadows of better things to come. The tabernacle,
which was the prototype of the temple, was not only
made according to a divine type or pattern, but was
itself a type in its material splendour of the moral
glory of the House of God, both on earth and in
heaven.| Even its principal contents or furniture had
* Rom. v. 14-18. t Heb. xi. 19.
t Heb. x. 1 ; Heb. ix. 8, 9 ; Heb. viii. 2, 5.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 49
a special typical significance, which the apostle did not
find it necessary to particularise.* Several events in
the history of the old world and of Israel were types
or symbols of higher spiritual realities.f The salvation
of one righteous family, through the medium of an
element which drowned the wicked world, was a type
of Christian baptism, which is called its countertype,
and in which the washing away of the filth of the
flesh signifies the washing of regeneration and the re
mission of sins. | The passage of ancient Israel through
the aqueous elements of the sea and the cloud was a
kind of baptismal sign of their entrance into the
covenant and Church of God, and of their self-dedica
tion to the Lord.§ The paschal lamb of the Passover,
which was both retrospective and prospective, sacrificial
and commemorative, is a type of Christ our Passover
sacrificed for us.[| The bread and water which sus
tained the people in the desert were symbols of the
bread and water of life, or of Christ Himself.1T The
ceremonial washings were present emblems of moral
purity in regeneration and remission of sin. The
animal sacrifices and blood-sprinklings were not only
present signs of the desert of sin and the necessity of
satisfaction, but also prospective types of the sacrifice
of Christ and of the cleansing power of His sprinkled
blood.** Certain also of the divine dealings with ancient
Israel are said to be types or examples of {he fixed
* Heb. ix. 5. 1 1 Cor. x. 7-11.
+ 1 Peter iii. 20, 21. § 1 Cor. x. 1-4.
|| 1 Cor. v. 7 ; John xix. 36. f 1 Cor. x. 3, 4.
** Heb. ix. 23 ; Heb. x. 1. D

50 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
principles of the divine moral government, and to be
recorded for our admonition, on whom the ends of the
age are come.* All these types were a kind of dumb
parables, which, like the word-parables of the great
Teacher, at once half revealed and half concealed the
truth. David, in his kingly capacity, and especially
in the troubles of his kingdom, is so clearly a type of
the humiliation and sufferings of Christ, that the anti
type is called by the name of the type.f Solomon, as
David's seed or son of promise, was a type of the
Messiah in the extent and peace and glory of His
kingdom. The sojourn of Israel in Egypt, with their
bitter bondage and their subsequent deliverance ; their
sad captivity in Babylon and their ultimate redemption,
are correlative and complimentary types of man's cap
tivity by Satan and his restoration by Jesus Christ.
The brazen serpent, between which and Himself our
Lord instituted so striking a comparison, is so signal
and appropriate an emblem of the mode of our salva
tion by faith in the crucified Redeemer, that it may
justly be regarded as a type of Christ.J
Jonah's deliverance from the whale's belly, where
he lay buried for three days and three nights, and by
which his commission to preach repentance to the
Ninevites was attested, typified the burial and resur
rection of Jesus, by which He was declared to be the
Son of God with power. §
* 1 Cor. x. 5-13. + Isa. Iv. 6. £ John iii. 14.
§ Matt. xii. 40 ; Jonah i. 17 ; Rom. i. 4.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 51

Section Second.
1. There is a natural transition from inarticulate
yet significant things to articulate words revealing the
future directly or indirectly through things of which
they are signs. We pass, accordingly, from analogy
and type to typical or indirect prophecy, which formally
differ {hough they possess a common underlying prin
ciple or basis, which is sometimes allowed to hide their
differences. Prophecy, the second form of the prospective prin
ciple, may be defined generally as a verbal sign or
formula of the future. It assumes two forms, direct
and indirect, or direct and typical prophecy. Mes
sianic prophecy, in particular, exhibits both forms.
From the very nature of the ancient economy, both
typical and direct non-Messianic prophecy are com
paratively limited. Christ was the central object of
the divine revelation from the beginning. The patri
archs from Adam to Abraham spake, and the prophets
from Moses to Malachi wrote of the Messiah, the
Saviour of Israel and the light of the Gentiles. The
whole. Old Testament was a prophecy of the New
generally, and of Christ specially. And, consequently,
the ancient prophecies, not strictly Messianip, are yet
all less or more connected with the person and work
and times of the Messiah. There are not many direct
and still fewer typical non-Messianic prophecies, and
apparentlynot any citations of the latter kind. Ezekiel's

52 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
vision of the dry bones of the house of Israel, in so far
as it is prophetic, is typical. It is a visionary scene, in
which natural things become the signs of present and
the prospective types of future realities. The moun
tain of the Lord's house which Isaiah saw established
on the tops of the mountains is a kind of typical
prophecy, founded on the site of the temple, of the
visible establishment, extension, and moral glory of the
Church of Christ. We have seen that the events
generally of the ancient theocracy were not only pre
sent instances and muffled types, but oracular announce
ments of the principles of the divine government in
every age. The symbolic utterances of the ancient
prophets, in which they suited the action to the word,
and the word to the action, were typical predictions,
involving promise or commination. This form of pro
phecy illustrates the connection between type and
prophecy already indicated. The former is the basis
of the latter. Prophecy is the articulate expression or
exponent of type, the tongue by which it speaks ex
pressly. It preannounces and quotation interprets
the typical facts or prospective aspects of the divine
economy. Type and typical prophecy are so closely
connected, that in any special instance they are forms
of the same thing. A careful analysis, also, of type
and prophecy in all its aspects, direct and indirect,
Messianic and non-Messianic, shows them to be in
their roots so closely intertwined, that they are some
times combined in the same instances, and all culminate
in Christ, the antitype, the focus of their convergent

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 53
lights, the grand goal of their divergent routes, the
ocean of their confluent streams.*
The real character of any prophecy, whether Mes
sianic or non-Messianic, is more easily determined than
its formal character, whether direct or typical. There
is ample room occasionally for difference of opinion
regarding the latter forms. The internal character of
any Messianic prophecy and its external form combine
to form and to determine its specific class or category.
Both classes are numerous, but the typical are fewer
than the direct, and more debateable. The distinc
tion between them is sometimes less palpable, from
the fact that the circumstances of the writer and his
torical elements have sometimes furnished the occa
sion, and even the form of a prophecy, which is not
properly typical. Sometimes a prediction cannot be
fairly interpreted as typical, because the points of
agreement between the supposed type and counter-
type are merely apparent, while the points of difference
are numerous and real. It may be highly figurative,
and 3ret not typical; and the circumstances or sur
roundings of the author may be merely the back
ground of his picture, and not the formal basis of the
prophetic fabric, the towers of which afford a com
manding and glorious prospect of the kingdom of
Messiah. 2. The following are clear instances of the class
that has a typical foundation. Matthew declares
* Matt, ii 18 ; Matt. xiii. 35 ; Acts i. 20 ; Rom. xi. 9, 10 ; Heb. ii. 6-8.

54 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
that the Scripture, " Out of Egypt have I called my
son," was spoken of the Son of God by the prophet
Hoshea.* It is based on typical facts in the history
of Israel, called the son of God, the first-born of Jeho
vah, preserved for a season in Egypt, and thence
called to the mission of a high destiny among the
nations, as a type of the Son of God, the infant
Redeemer, who found shelter in Egypt from the rage
of Herod.f Of all the ancient, and especially the
paschal Scriptures, said to have been fulfilled in con
nection with the crucifixion, there is none more clearly
typical than the injunction regarding the paschal lamb,
which the evangelist applies to Christ, with merely a
change of pronoun, which makes the type clearer — " A
bone of Him shall not be broken. "J
The great Teacher is said to have spoken in par
ables, that the mode of instruction adopted by an
ancient prophet of God, similar in substance, yet dis
similar in form, might thereby be fulfilled. § It was
necessary that a method of teaching which, under a
diversity of form, was not only peculiar to the East,
and singularly appropriate to a rudimentary dispensa
tion, but specially characteristic of the prophetic office,
should be reproduced and realised in its highest form
* Matt. ii. 15 ; Matt. xiii. 35 ; Matt. xxi. 42 ; Matt, xxvii. 46
John xv. 25 ; John xix. 24, 28, 36 ; Acts i. 20 ; Acts ii. 25-28
Acts xiii. 33-35 ; Acts iv. 25, 26 ; Eph. iv. 8 ; John ii. 17
Heb. 1, 5 lp. ; Heb. ii. 12, 13 ; Heb. x. 5-8 ; Heb. i. 8, 9 ; Rom.
xv. 3.
f Matt. ii. 15 ; Hosea xi. 1. J John xix. 36 ; Exod. xii. 46.
§ Matt. xiii. 35 ; Ps. lxxviii. 2.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 55
in the great Prophet of the Church. He taught by
parables not merely that the integral and uniform
principles of human nature, or of the divine moral
government, might receive their fullest exemplifica
tion, but more particularly that an expediential prin
ciple of the divine scheme of revelation might obtain
its highest fulfilment.
The ancient psalms, so emphatically declared by
Peter to have been spoken by the Holy Spirit concern
ing Judas, and fulfilled in his dismal doom, though
they involve in their application to Judas the principle
of moral analogy, must be specifically interpreted as
indirect Messianic prophecies, according to which Ahi-
thophel and his fellow-conspirators, the enemies of
David, represented Judas and his wicked associates,
the betrayers and murderers of the Lord.* Still more
clearly is this the exegetical principle of that grand
prophetic psalm of the resurrection of Christ, which
declared that His soul would not be left in hades nor
His flesh see corruption.f "The sure mercies of David,"
promised to Christ and to all His people, involve the
resurrection from the dead, as a part and pledge of their
full possession.^ The pregnant and profound words of
the second psalm, " Thou art my Son, this day have I
begotten Thee," are a typical prediction of the incarna
tion of Messiah, or of His being raised up into theworld.§
The repeated quotation, "The stone which the builders
* Acts i 20, with Ps. Ixix. 25, and Ps. cix.
t Acts ii. 25-28, with Ps. xvi. 8, 11, and Acts xiii. 35-37.
J Acts xiii. 34, with Isa. Iv. 3. § Acts xiii. 33, with Ps. ii. 8.

56 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
rejected, the same is become the head of the corner,"
primarily described the rejection by the old world
builders of Israel, the son of God, and the type of the
Messiah and His people, Christ personal and collective.*
The long and elaborate quotation in Hebrews from one
of the psalms, so replete with Messianic ideas and con
nected with other similar psalms, is to be understood
as made on the same typical principle, though it. also
implies the analogy of the same spiritual sentiments in
David and in Christ. f In the citation of the signal
promise made to David regarding his son and heir,
Solomon is evidently typical of the Messiah .| The
cited passage, " Behold, I and the children which God
hath given me," is indirectly Messianic ; the prophet
Isaiah being there in his official character and functions
a type of the Great Prophet of Israel. S
These instances are sufficient to show the close
relation of material type and typical prophecy, and the
radical and real agreement between type and antitype.
But as typical prophecies are simply a combination of
type with prophecy, of words with things as signs, it
follows that the prophetic word may point solely to
Christ ; and, therefore, that the quotations made from
such prophecies may be directly Messianic. The
quotations already given, by which Peter proves the
resurrection of Christ, and Paul His divinity, are of
this character. This consideration prevents confusion
* Matt. xxi. 42, with Ps. cxviii. 22, 23.
t Heb. x. 5-9, with Ps. xl. 6, 7.
+ Heb. i. 5 lp., with 2 Sam. vii. 14.
§ Heb. ii. 13 lp., with Isa, viii. 14, 18.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 57
in the classification of Messianic prophecy, and indi
cates the point of contact and transition between the
two classes. Among the direct prophecies of Messiah
we class several, sometimes improperly regarded as in
direct, merely on account of their setting and scenery,
which do not determine their character. The back
ground of a prophecy must not be confounded with
its basis, nor its occasion with its character, nor figura
tive language with determinate form. Thus, Isaiah's
prophecy of the child Immanuel, though invested with
the form and body of the times, is not a typical Mes
sianic prophecy, founded on a typical birth, which can
not be discovered ; but a direct Messianic announcement
of the birth of an extraordinary child, which the author
expected to be born of the virgin, a singular person,
and to be one who would carry out and complete the
covenant of David, and confirm his kingdom for ever,
even after not only Syria and Israel had gone down,
but Judah also had been diminished and shorn of its
glory.* The singular quotation from the sacred pro-
phets,f ¦" He shall be called a Nazarene," found formally
nowhere, is not a typical prediction, founded merely on
a symbolical and philological relation between netzer
and Nazareth, but a direct Messianic prophecy, in the
paraphrastic form of quotation, grammatically inter
preted and applied to His reputed character and birth
place, for both of which He was despised, and, in point
* Matt, i 23, with Isa. vii. 14.
+ Matt, ii 23, with Isa. liii. 2, 3, &c, and Isa. xi. 1, and Isa. iv. 2 ;
Zech. iii. 8, and Zech. vi. 12.

58 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
of fact, rejected by the Jews. Thus there was not
only a coincidence between name and thing, between
Nazareth and contempt, which made the fulfilment of
the prophecy more striking, but the divine prophetic
idea was realised and- expressed in the highest possible
form. The place of Messiah's upbringing was fitted,
and therefore designed, to incur contempt and rejection;
and, therefore, the ancient prophecies which went
before regarding Him must be accomplished there.
These ideas are expressed in the passages cited, and
form the basis of an application, in which there is
nothing peculiar, except the local element of His resi
dence at Nazareth. On the same grounds we classify
and interpret two signal quotations, made from the
same unique but mysterious range of prophecy of
Zechariah, but ascribed in one of the instances to
Jeremiah, not only as the major prophet, but also as
having furnished the basis of the minor prophecy, both
in its conception and its dramatic action."" The pro
phet, instead of representing himself and the treatment
which he or any other faithful prophet or wise shepherd
did or would receive from the false and fickle flock of
Judah, as a type of more indignant treatment of the
covenant God of Israel, the Good Shepherd, merely
personates Jehovah-Messiah, of whose manifestation all
the prophets spake, and presents Him as directly
declaring His own fate, not only at the hands of a
faithless flock, but of God Himself, together with not
* Matt. xxvi. 31, Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, with Zech. xiii. 7, and Zech. xi.
12, 13.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 59
merely the immediate dispersion of His followers on
the night of His betrayal, but also the ultimate dis
persion of the nation. Reading in this light the
prophecy and its application, we may well say, with
Hengstenberg, " The agreement of prophecy and fulfil
ment is so striking, that it would force itself upon us
although it had been indicated by no declaration of the
New Testament. What could the last and most fearful
expression of ingratitude towards the Good Shepherd
here predicted be, other than the murderous plot by
which the Jews rewarded the pastoral fidelity of Christ,
and for the accomplishment of which Judas was bribed?"
The quotation, " And let all the angels of God worship
Him," applied to our Lord's advent into the world, is
made from a prophetic psalm, which, like others of the
same character, contains the mystery of Messiah, in
whom alone it finds its proper and true fulfilment. *
The other Messianic prophecies are so decidedly direct
as to be self-evident. We submit a table of the whole
in the full consciousness of the frequent difficulty of
discriminating indirect and immediate Messianic pro-
phecies.f There is no question on which students of
prophecy have been more divided, and none that is
* Heb. i 6, with Ps. xcvii. 7. See also Ps. xciii, xcv., xcvi, xeviii,
xcix., ci, cii
t Matt. ii. 6 ; Matt. iii. 3 ; Matt. iv. 14-16 ; Matt. xi. 10 ; Matt.
xii. 17-21 ; Matt. xxii. 43, 44 ; Matt. xxvi. 31 ; Matt, i 23 ; Matt.
xxvii. 9, 10 ; Matt. ii. 23 ; Matt. viii. 17 ; Matt. xxi. 4, 5 ; Mark xv.
28 ; Mark i 3 ; Luke iii 4 ; Luke xxii. 37 ; John i. 23 ; John xix. 3, 7 ;
Acts ii. 34 ; Acts iii. 22, 23, 25 ; Acts iii. 25 ; Rom. xiv. 11 ; Rom. ix.
33 ; Rom. xi. 26, 27 ; Rom. xv. 12 ; Rom. x. 13 ; Gal. iii. 8, 16 ; Eph.
v. 14 ; with Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20 ; Heb. i 8 ; Heb. v. 6.

60 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
more open to doubtful disputation. We conclude this
investigation by an induction of quotation prophecies,
which may be designated involute rather than either
typical or direct Messianic. And as typical prophecies
less or more directly predict what they indirectly pre
figure, so the involute Messianic imply the personal
advent and work of Christ, but directly declare their
results in the salvation of believers and the deeper
damnation of unbelievers, in the illumination of some
and the judicial blindness of others, in the regeneration
of society and the downfall of Satan's kingdom, in times
of refreshing from the presence of the Lord and in tides
of judgment, in the rejection of the faithless Jews and
the calling of the benighted Gentiles. They express a
Messianic condition of things, which completely solves
the mystery of the Messiah, wrapt up in the ancient
prophecies. They announce the antecedents, concomi
tants, and consequences of an advent and redemptive
work, which another class of prophecies directly pro
claims.""" 3. The quotations already adduced, classed, and
partly illustrated under the different aspects of pro
phecy, may be regarded as sufficient to show the prin
ciple of interpretation on which the New Testament
writers proceeded. We conclude this part of the sub-
* Matt. iii. 3 ; Mark i 2 ; Matt. xiii. 14, 15 ; Matt. xv. 8, 9 ; Luke
iii. 4 ; John vi. 45 ; John xii. 38, 40 ; Acts ii. 16-21 ; Acts xiii. 40, 41 ;
Acts xv. 16, 17 ; Rom. ix. 25, 26, 27, 28 ; Rom. xv. 9, 10, 11 ; 1 Cor.
xv. 54 ; 1 Cor. ii. 9 ; Rom. x. 19, 20 ; Rom. xi. 9, 10 ; Rom. iv. 18 ;
Gal. iv. 27 ; Heb. ii. 6-8.

PRINCIPLES OF INTERPRETATION. 61
ject by a passing reference to the principle, or rather
practice, of accommodation, which is the correlative of
the principle of allusion, already examined. It con
sists in appropriating the form merely, and not the
matter of a passage. It accommodates or applies
Old Testament forms of thought or phraseology to the
expression or the illustration of evangelical sentiments
or doctrines. To these the writers merely allude, that
they may apply them loosely to the presentation of
other and higher truths. They are invariably em
ployed to communicate and commend truth, and not
to convey and to countenance error.* Thus, the Scrip
ture, " The man who doeth these things shall live by
them," is a proper quotation and application of a
passage in the law which describes the results of legal
obedience ; but the subsequent context of Paul, though
it contrasts the righteousness of faith with that of
works, is not an authoritative interpretation of Moses,
but a parenthetical modification and accommodation of
the form of a graphic passage, descriptive of the near
ness or accessibility of the law and the facility of
obedience, to the presentation of the higher evangelical
truth of justification or righteousness by faith in the
gospel of Jesus Christ.f
The application of the passage from the nineteenth
psalm, describing the circuits of the orbs of heaven,
''Their line is gone out through all the earth, and their
words to the end of the world," to the general procla
mation of the gospel to the world, is an accommo-
* Rom. x. 5 ; Lev. xviii. 5. t Rom. x. 6-9 ; Deut. xxx. 12, 14.

62 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
dation of the form of the text, and not a fanciful
analogue between the lights of the natural and the
moral worlds, much less a typical prediction founded
on typical natural facts.* In such instances the pri
mary idea is modified by a paraphrase, or so palpably
accommodated in its form as to carry no logical autho
rity, and to occasion no difficulty of interpretation.
* Rom. x. 18 ; Ps. xix. 3, 4.

PAET III.
ANALOGOUS QUOTATION.
THE APOSTOLIC AND EARLY FATHERS.
Section First.
1. We shall employ the same method in connection
with this cognate department of quotation, examining
in order the sources of the citations made by the early
Fathers, their introductory formulas and forms, and
the principles of mterpretation followed. We shall
find a general agreement on these points between the
authors of the New Testament and the Fathers of the
Church, with some specific differences, especially of
interpretation, the character and value of which re
main to be discussed and determined. The Apostolic
Fathers, so called as having been contemporary with
the Apostles, are five in number — Hermas, Barnabas,
and Clement of Rome ; Polycarp of Smyrna, and Igna
tius of Antioch. Like the authors of the New Testa
ment, they all wrote in Greek, though Barnabas at
least was a Jew. Irenseus expressly states that both
the Apostles and the Fathers quoted the Septuagint,
or Seventy Elders.* The conquests of Alexander the
Great and the Septuagint version had made the Greek
language so current throughout the Roman empire,
* Iren. lib. iii. c. 21.

64 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
and especially throughout the Church, that Hellenistic
Jews, as well as Greeks, generally preferred the Sep
tuagint, even when less accurate, to the old vernacular
Hebrew. The Jews, ever since the Babylonish capti
vity, had lost the full and facile command of their
native tongue, and spoke the Aramaean or Syro-Chal-
daic, which is a branch or dialect of the ancient
Hebrew. This was less or more the oral language of
the Jews in the days of our Lord, as is evident from
the formal and frequent citation of His very words in
the gospels. It had been used from the time of Ezra
downwards to Christ as the language of formal com
ment on the Hebrew text of the law in most of the
Jewish synagogues. But it gradually died out, both
as the language of ordinary life and of religious wor
ship, till, at the Christian era, we find the Greek
tongue in common use both in social life and in the
synagogue by the Jews, who were called Grecists or
Hellenists. Accordingly, the authors of the period,
such as Philo and Josephus, the writers of the New
Testament, and the earliest Fathers, Jewish and Greek,
wrote in Greek, and generally cited the Septuagint.
The Christian Jews retained their national forms of
thought, and wrote impure or Hellenistic Greek ; while
the Greek Fathers, who generally were ignorant of
Hebrew, from their habitual converse with the Sep
tuagint and the influence of the new ideas of the
Christian economy on their language, would become
tinged with Hebraism, and lose their classic peculiarity
or propriety.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 65
The Apostolic Fathers cited or alluded to the Old
or the New Scriptures as their subject and their cir
cumstances demanded. In the Shepherd of Hermas
we find numerous allusions, both literal and ideal, to
most of the books of the New Testament, and especi
ally to the four gospels; but the allegorical or mystical
character of the work, which consists of visions, simili
tudes and precepts delivered by angels, did not any
more than the Apocalypse require express or formal
quotation. The epistles of Barnabas and Clement are
full of citations from the Old Testament and of
frequent allusions to the New, which are of such a
character, and made in such circumstances, as to have
the value of quotations. Clement ascribes to Paul
the First Epistle to the Corinthians, which Polycarp
expressly quotes, as well as Paul's epistles to the
Philippians and Ephesians, the last of which Ignatius
in his epistle to them attributes to the same Apostle.
Polycarp and Ignatius, on the other hand, seldom
either cite or refer to the Old Testament, but they
frequently both quote and allude to the New, under
the designation of " Holy Scriptures, " or " Sacred
Writings," and "The Gospel," and "Apostles," corre
sponding to " the law and the prophets " of the Jewish
nomenclature. 2. The quotation formulas both of the Apostolic
and post- Apostolic Fathers may be thus stated and
classified and compared with one another, and specially
with those of the New Testament. Among the
E

66 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
earliest Fathers we find the following diversity of
form* — "It is written;" "God," "The Lord," or "The
Son of God," " said, or says, or shows ; " " The Holy
Spirit says; " " The Holy Scriptures," or " The Sacred
Word," "show us;" "Paul," or other writer, "says."
The later Fathers use substantially the same marks of
quotation f — "We read in the law;" "It is said in
the gospels; " " Christ Himself has said; " " The Lord
hath taught us; " " The Lord says in the gospels; "
" The Holy Spirit in the Apostle says;" "The gospel
says ; " "The evangelic voice teaches ; " "The Scriptures
teach;" "The Divine Word teaches;" "The Apostle
says," or " Paul has explained," or " The admirable
Apostle," "The excellent Paul," "explains;" "Peter,"
or "John," or "Mark," or " Luke," "says;" "John, one
of the Apostles, prophesied;" " As they have taught who
have written the history of those things concerning
Jesus Christ." It is evident that these several formulas
of the Fathers are similar, and correspond each to each,
that they may all be reduced to two classes correspond
ing to those of the New Testament already stated as
general, particular and prophetic formulas, of which
the last is not found in the Fathers.
* Clem. (Rom.) caps. 13, 18, 24, 23, 36, 30, 46, 56. Bar. caps. 4, 7.
Ig. Eph. 5. Poly. Phil. caps. 2, 8, 11, 12.
f Just. Apol. p. 94 ; Dial. pp. 266, 317, 308 ; Apol. p. 267. Diog.
Epis. passim. Iren. lib. iii. cap. 10, sec. 6. Theoph. lib. ii. iii. Clem.
(Alex.) Peed. lib. i. ii. iii. vi. Strom, lib. i. ii. vii.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 67

Section Second.
When we examine the forms of citation, we find a
still closer correspondence with those of the New
Testament. Even the principles of interpretation
which appear to have regulated the Fathers in quota
tion substantially agree with those of the inspired
writers, with a signal exceptional difference, which
increases rather than reduces the apologetic value of
their evidence. And, as the form of a quotation and
its application or interpretation are closely connected,
and sometimes coincident, we shall simplify and
curtail the discussion as much as possible by examin
ing both together. This observation is specially ap
plicable to the first in order, viz. — -
1. Literal quotation. Clement of Rome and Bar
nabas not only quote, but generally at the same time
interpret literally the Old Testament, and almost in
variably the Septuagint.* Cited passages are certainly
* Clem. 4>nd Gen. iv. 3, 8. Clem. 4 and Exod. ii. 14. Clem. 6 and
Gen. ii. 23. Clem. 8 and Isa. i. 16-20. Clem. 10 and Gen. xii. 1-3.
Clem. 10 and Gen. xiii. 14-16, and Gen. xv. 5, 6. Clem. 14 and Ps.
xxxvi. 35-37. Clem. 15 and Isa. xxix. 13, Ps. lxi. 5, Ps. xxx. 19, Ps.
Ixxvii. 36, 37. Clem. 16 and Isa. liii, Ps. xxi. 7-9. Clem. 17 and
Gen. xviii. 27. Clem. 18 and Ps. 1. 3-19. Clem. 22 and Ps. xxxii. 11-
18. Clem. 29 and Deut. xxxii. 8, 9. Clem. 35 and Ps. xlix. 16, 23. Clem.
36 and Ps. ciii 4. Clem. 36 and Ps. ii. 7, 8. Clem. 36 and Ps. ex. 1.
Clem. 39 and Job iv. 16-18, Job iv. 19-21, Job v. 1-5, Job xv. 15. Clem.
46 and Ps. xvii. 26, 27. Clem. 48 and Ps. cxvii. 19, 20. Clem. 50 and
Isa. xxvi 20. Clem. 50 and Ps. xxxii. 1, 2. Clem. 52 and Ps. lxviii.
31, 33, Ps. xlix. 15, Ps. 1. 19. Clem. 53 and Deut. ix. 12, 13, 14. Clem.

68 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
not always interpreted on a principle correlative to
the mode of their citation, but in the following
illustrative instances the form and the principle of the
quotations are coincident. Most of the literal cita
tions in particular are evidently literally or grammat
ically interpreted. This is evident from a comparison
of the form of a passage with its application. Thus,
Clement cites and interprets the Septuagint literally,
" This is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh."
And Barnabas, quoting the same version, says, " Let us
make man according to our image and our likeness." *
And even when the interpretation of a text does
not answer to its form, and is altogether irrelevant,
there is yet ample evidence of the recognition of
certain principles, even in their misapplication.
2. Substantial quotation. Here, as in the New
Testament, we find the substance of a passage both in
sense and form combined in quotation. f Clement,
54 and Ps. xxiii. 1. Clem. 56 and Ps. cxl. 5. Clem. 56 and Job v. 17,
26. Clem. 57 and Prov. i 23, 31. Bar. 4 and Isa. v. 21. Bar. 5 and
Gen. i. 26. Bar. 5 and Ps. xxi. 21. Bar. 5 and Isa. 1. 6, 7. Bar. 6
and Isa. xxii. 16, 18, Ps. cxviii. 12. Bar. 6 and Gen. i. 26, 28, Ezek.
xi. 19, xxxvi. 26. Bar. 6 and Isa. iii. 9. Bar. 6 and Ps. cxvii.
22, 24. Bar. 9 and Isa. i. 2. Bar. 10 and Ps. i. 1. Bar. 11 and Jer. ii.
12, 13. Bar. 11 and Isa. xvi. 12. Bar. 11 and Isa. xxxiii. 16-18. Bar.
11 and Ps. i 3-6. Bar. 12 and Ps. cix. 1. Bar. 12 and Isa. xiv. 1.
Bar. 13 and Gen. xxv. 23. Bar. 14 and Deut. ix. 12. Bar. 14 and Isa.
xiii. 6, 7. Bar. 14 and Isa. xlix. 6, Isa. lxi 1, 2. Bar. 15 and Gen. ii. 2
(Heb.) Bar. 15 and Ps. Ixxxix. 4. Bar. 16 and Isa. lxvi. 1. Ig. 5, ad
Eph. and Prov. iii. 34. Ig. ad Mag. 12 and Prov. xviii. 17. Ig.
Martyr 6 and Prov. x. 24. Ig. Martyr 2 and Lev. xxvi. 12.
* Clem. 6 and Gen. ii. 23. Bar. 5 and Gen. i. 26.
+ Clem. 3 and Deut. xxxii. 15. Clem. 8 and Ezek. xxxiii. 11, Ezek.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 69
citing and applying to the Corinthian Church the
wayward folly and ingratitude of Jeshurun or Israel,
says, " The beloved ate and drank and was enlarged,
and waxed fat and kicked." And Barnabas applies
to the Judaising Christians of his time the words of
the Lord to Moses on the mount, in reference to back
sliding Israel, " Moses, descend quickly, for thy people
whom thou hast led out of the land of Egypt have
transgressed the law."* These instances may suffice.
to indicate the principle, but a detailed examination
of the whole class is necessary to clarify and confirm
it. Most of the cases are grammatically interpreted
and justly applied, but the gnostic or allegorical
principle of interpretation occasionally appears, especi
ally in the writings of Barnabas, who declares that
the good land of Canaan, flowing with milk and honey,
denotes primarily the human nature of Christ, and
next the renewed nature of Christians, so that the
promise of Cannan was a prophecy of Christ, for science
xviii. 30, Ezek. xxxiii. 12. Clem. 14 and Prov. ii. 21, 22. Clem. 13 and
Jer. ix. 23, 24. Clem. 13 and Isa. lxvi. 2. Clem. 17 and Job i. 1.
Clem. 23 and Mai. iii. 1. Clem. 26 and Job xix. 26. Clem. 26 and
Ps. iii. 6. Clem. 28 and Ps. cxxxviii. 7-10. Clem. 33 and Gen. i. 26, 27.
Clem. 43 and Num. xii. 7. Clem. 52 and Exod. xxxii. 7-9. Clem.
53 and Exod. xxxii. 33. Bar. 2 and Isa. i. 11-14, Jer. vii. 22, 23, Zech.
viii. 17, Ps. L 19. Bar. 3 and Isa. Iviii. 4, 5, Isa. vi. 10. Bar. 4 and
Exod. xxxii. 7, Deut. ix. 12. Bar. 5 and Isa. liii. 5, Prov. i. 17. Bar. 5
and Ps. xxii. 16. Bar. 6 and Isa. xxviii. 16, Isa. 1. 8, 9, Isa. 1. 7. Bar.
6 and Ps. xxii 21. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi 7, 10. Bar. 9 and Ps. xvii.
45, Isa. xxxiii. 10, Jer. iv. 4, Jer. vii. 2, Isa. i. 10, Jer. ix. 25, 26. Bar.
10 and Deut. xiv., Lev. xi. 3. Bar. 11 and Isa. xiv. 2, 3. Bar. 12 and
Isa. lxv. 2. Bar. 12 and Num. xxi. 9. Bar. 15 and Isa. i 13.
* Clem. 3 ; Deut. xxxii. 15 ; and Bar. 4; Deut. ix. 12, Exod. xxxii.
7,8.

70 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
said of it, " Hope in Jesus, who is about to be mani
fested in the flesh to you."*
3. Synthetic quotation is as frequent in the Fathers
as in the New Testament, f Two or more texts are
conjoined or combined in one citation. Sometimes
they stand simply in juxtaposition, sometimes in closest
combination. Clement thus combines two passages
from Moses, " Who am I that thou sendest me 1 for
I am of slow tongue, and of feeble speech." J He de
clares the reward of good works by conjoining Isaiah
with the Apocalypse, " For He foretells us, ' Behold,
the Lord cometh, and His reward is before Him, to
render unto every one according to his own work.' " §
He proves chastisement, divine or human, to be salutary
and a sign of the divine love by a combination of texts
from David and Solomon, " For thus sayeth the Holy
Word, ' The Lord hath certainly chastised me, and
hath not given me over unto death ; for whom the
Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son
whom He receiveth.' "||
We find also that the synthesis is sometimes literal,
* Bar. 6 and Exod. xxxiii. 3.
f Clem. 17 and Exod. iii. 11, Exod. iv. 10. Clem. 34 and Isa. xi 10,
Rev. xxii. 12. Clem. 34 and Dan. vii. 10, Isa. vi. 3. Clem. 56 and
Ps. cxvii. 18, Prov. iii 12. Bar. 2 and Jer. vii. 22, 23, Zech. viii. 17.
Bar. 4 and Exod. xxxi. 18, Exod. xxxiv. 28. Bar. 6 and Exod. xxxiii. 1,
Lev. xx. 24. Bar. 9 and Gen. xiv. 14, Gen. xvii. 26, 27. Bar. 13 and
Gen. xlviii. 9, 11. Bar. 13 and Gen. xv. 6, Gen. xvii. 5. Bar. 14 and
Exod. xxiv. 18, Exod. xxxi. 18.
J Clem. 17 and Exod. iii. 11, Exod. iv. 10.
§ Clem. 34 and Isa. xl. 10, Isa. Ixii. 11, Apoc. xxii. 12.
|| Clem. 56 and Ps. cxvii. 18, Prov. iii. 12.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 71
at other times substantial, and sometimes merely para
phrastic* But under all its forms it involves two
important hermeneutical principles recognised by the
Fathers. It assumes the unity of revelation not only
in diversity but in development, which is the foun
dation of both synthetic and analogical interpretation.
These authors, amid occasional vagaries and even
false principles of interpretation, generally understood
the unity of the economies, and also applied the facts
and truths of ancient Scripture to the illustration or
defence of corresponding evangelical doctrines. Even
gnostic allegory, so prominent in Barnabas and others,
in multiplying types and carrying analogy to ridiculous
excess, recognises the unity of Scripture.
4. Paraphrastic is similar to substantial citation,
but more loosely rendered. It translates the sense of
a passage without its form into another and generally
a higher and more ideal form.f Clement cites in this
* Clem. 29 and Num. xviii. 27, 2 Chron. xxxi. 14.
t Clem. 8 and Ps. cii. 1, Isa. i 18, Jer. iii. 19, 22. Clem. 17 and
Job xiv. 4, 5. Clem. 18 and Ps. lxxxviii. 21. Clem. 20 and Job
xxxviii. 11. Clem. 21 and Prov. xx. 27. Clem. 26 and Ps. xxvii. 7, Ps. iii.
6, Job xix. 25, 26. Clem. 29 and Num. xviii. 27, 2 Chron. xxxi. 14.
Clem. 32 and Gen. xxii. 17. Clem. 42 and Isa. Ix. 17. Clem. 50 and
Ezek. xxxvii. 12, 13. Bar. 4 and Dan. vii. 24, Dan. vii. 7, 8. Bar. 6
and Isa. viii 14. Bar. 6 and Ezek. xi. 19, Ezek. xxxvi. 26. Bar. 6 and
Ps. xii 3. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi. 7-10. Bar. 9 and Ps. xxxiii 13, Isa.
xl. 3, Jer. iv. 3, Jer. vii. 26. Bar. 9 and Gen. xvii. 26, 27, Gen. xiv. 14.
Bar. 10 and Lev. iv. 1. Bar. 11 and Zeph. iii. 19. Bar. 11 and Ezek.
xlvii. 12. Bar. 12 and Exod. xvii. 14. Bar. 13 and Gen. xlviii. 18, 19.
Bar. 15 and Exod. xx. 8, Deut. v. 12. Bar. 15 and Jer. xvii. 24, 25.
Bar. 16 and Isa. xlix. 17. Bar. 16 and Jer. xxv., Isa. v. Bar. 16 and
Dan. ix. 24-27, Haggai ii 6-10. Bar. 7 and Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 21.

72 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
way three passages from the books of Psalms and of
Job, "For He somewhere sayeth, And Thou wilt raise
me up, and I shall confess unto Thee." * " And, I
went to sleep, and slept ; I awoke for Thou art with
me." These texts are applied improperly to prove
the resurrection of the dead, but the form of the
citations is valid. The form may be correct and yet
the interpretation false, but not reversely. "And again
Job says, And Thou wilt raise up my flesh, which
has borne all these things." f This class of quotations
is sometimes so loose and vague that some critics refer
them to the apocryphal hooks, but the writers them
selves declare them to be spoken by God Himself
" somewhere," which shows that they were taken
from Scripture and made from memory. J Sometimes
we meet with a paraphrastic synthesis of several texts,
in which all the freedom consistent with quotation is
used as in the New Testament, and even when the
citation is incorrect, both in form and sense, we have
a recognition of the principle. In Barnabas we find
some signal examples of idealistic quotation, especially
his definition or designation of azazel or the scapegoat.
" Take two he-goats, good and like, and offer them,
and let the priest offer the one goat for a holocaust,
and let the other be 'accursed.' "S The one goat was
set apart for sacrifice or atonement, the other, or
azazel, as both the derivation of the term and the
description of the function of the animal imply, was
* Ps. iii. 5 ; Ps. xxii. 25. t Job xix. 26.
t #eo —Clem. 26 ; Ps. xxvii. 7.
§ £«x«t«j«to(. Bar. 7; Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 21.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 73
for removal or dismissal as the sin-bearer, laden with
the iniquities of the people, and consequently accursed'
of God. These animals, thus disposed of on the great
day of atonement, were complemental types of Christ,
our Sin-bearer, under the double but not divided
aspects of atonement and remission of sin.
5. Eclectic quotation is a select extract from a
passage instead of the whole. Nothing in citation can
be more natural, appropriate, and expedient. It con
tributes to the brevity, point, and force of a writer's
argument. Barnabas thus analyses and cites two
passages from the law and the prophet Isaiah : " Ye
shall have nothing either graven or molten for a god
to you ; " and, " Who hath measured the heavens with
a span, and the earth with the palm of the hand ? Is
it not I ? " * In the " Martyrdom of Ignatius," an
early writing, but not of the apostolic age, we find the
martyr thus answering the Emperor by an excerpt
from the law : " Trajan said, ' Dost thou then carry in
thyself the Crucified ? ' Ignatius said, Yes, for it
is written, ' I will dwell and I will walk among
them.' " f The citation and its interpretation are alike
valid. 6 . The prospective principle of interpretation, espe
cially in its typical form, is carried to excess by these
Fathers, and particularly by Barnabas, who finds types
* Bar. 12 ; Lev. xxvii. 15. Bar. 16 ; Isa. xl. 12.
t Ig. Martyr 2 ; Lev. xxvi. 12, 2 Cor. vi. 16.

74 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
of the person and passion of Christ, and of the institu
tions of the gospel, in almost everything connected
with the ceremonial or ritual economy. Not only
certain public persons and the public animal sacrifices,
but the meat offerings themselves, and even the clean
and unclean meats, were symbols both of present truths
and of prospective Messianic benefits. Contending
with the Judaisers, who maintained that Christians
were bound to observe the law of Moses, he labours in
several successive chapters to demonstrate by a tissue
of frequently fantastic types, allegorically interpreted,
that the ceremonial law was a transient shadow of the
new covenant. And, accordingly, we expect to find in
these writers typical prophecy, which is prophecy on
the basis of type. On this principle most of their
quotations of ancient prophecy were made. We recog
nise like citations in the New Testament as valid, and
are bound to investigate and determine not only the
fact but the form of the principle on which they are
made, whether it be typical or direct ; but in patristic
quotation the same issues are not at stake, and it is
sufficient for our purpose to find there the principle of
Messianic prophecy. The Fathers cite and apply the
same prophecies, and sometimes in the same way and
on the same principles. In an uncritical age prin
ciples may be realised and acted on without having
been made the objects of formal examination or of
reflective consciousness. Philosophers, in the successful
study both of matter and of mind, proceeded occasion
ally, and perhaps unconsciously, on inductive principles,

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 75
before Bacon published his Novum Organum, or
Descartes his Metaphysics. The frequent difficulty
of determining the specific character of a Messianic
prophecy and the principle on which it is interpreted
in the New Testament, is felt to be still greater in the
case of the Fathers, who carried the Messianic principle
so far as to find prophecies of Christ in plain historical
statements, such as the following, which Barnabas
applies to the crucifixion of Christ : " All day long I
have stretched out my hands to a people incredulous
and contradictory to my just way."* But all that our
argument requires is evidence that ancient Scripture
was interpreted by the Fathers as Messianic prophecy,
whether direct or indirect. Barnabas applies distinctly,
and apparently directly, to Christ the following pas
sages : — " And again sayeth the prophet, He is placed
like a strong stone for bruising ; " and, " Behold I put
into the foundations of Zion a stone, precious, elect, a
corner stone, honourable." " And, again, the prophet
says, The stone which the builders rejected, the same
has become the head of the corner, "f
Section Third.
We have found that the earliest Church Fathers
'distinctly quote, and generally even interpret, the Old
Testament in the same way and on the same principles
as the authors of the New Testament. We shall next
* Bar. 12 ; Isa. lxv. 2.
T Bar. 6 ; Isa. viii. 14, Isa. xxviii. 16, Ps. cxvii. 12.

76 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
examine how these writers cite the New Testament,
both gospels and epistles ; and if we find that they are
quoted in the same way as the ancient Scripture, we
shall obtain a double analogy, the basis of a double or
cumulative argument in defence of New Testament
quotation. 1. Literal quotation appears upon the forefront of
all these writings. Barnabas, citing a memorable say
ing of the Lord in the gospels, says, " Let us therefore
take care lest we be found as it is written, Many are
called, few are chosen."* Polycarp says, "Do we not
know that the saints shall judge the world ? as Paul
teaches. "f And again, "For I trust that ye are well
exercised in the Holy Scriptures, as it is said, ' Be angry
and sin not; and let not the sun go down upon your
wrath.'" J Ignatius says, "The tree is manifest by its
fruit. "§
2. Substantial citation occurs frequently, and, whether
made from memory or from the book, clearly shows
that the Fathers, like the New Testament writers in
their quotations from the Old Testament, and in their
different reports of the sayings of the Lord, paid more
regard to the sense than to the mere form of Scripture.
Polycarp in this way cites Paul, " According as He
* Bar. 4 ; Matt. xx. 16. f Poly. 11 ; 1 Cor. vi. 2.
J Poly. 12 ; Eph. iv. 26.
§ Ig. Eph. 14 ; Matt. xii. 33. See also Poly. 7 ; Matt. xxvi. 41.
Poly. 1 ; 1 Peter i 8. Poly. 2 ; 1 Peter iii. 9. Poly. 10 ; 1 Peter v. 5.
Diog. ; 1 Cor. viii. 1.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 77
hath promised us, that He will raise us up from the
dead, and that if we walk worthy of Him, we shall
also reign with Him."""" In the epistle to Diognetus
we read, " Christ has taught us not to be solicitous
about raiment or food."f And of Christ it is said,
" He Himself took our sins." J
3. Synthesis in quotation, involving the underlying
principles of interpretation already indicated, pervades
the Fathers. S Polycarp thus quotes in combination
several of our Lord's sayings — " But remembering
what the Lord said, teaching : ' Judge not, that ye be
not judged. Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. Be
merciful, that ye may obtain mercy. With what
measure ye mete, it shall be meted to you again.
And blessed are the poor, and they that are persecuted
for righteousness' sake, for theirs is the kingdom of
God.'" On the same principle Clement cites the same
or similar passages in a different order. []
4. Paraphrase in quotation, in a form as highly
ideal as in the New Testament, is not uncommon in
the Fathers. IT Barnabas, in a passage which stands
connected with the prospect of perilous times, citing
* Poly. 5 ; 2 Tim. ii 11, 12. See also Poly. 11 ; 2 Thess. iii. 15.
t Diog. u. ix. ; Matt. vi. 25-31. J Diog. c. ix. ; 1 Peter ii. 24.
§ Poly. 2 ; Matt. v. 3, 7, 10, Matt. vii. 1, 2, Luke vi. 20, 36, 38.
II Clem. 1, 13 ; Luke vi. 36, Matt. vii. 1, 12.
1 Bar. 4 ; Matt. x. 32, 33, 38, 39, James iv. 7, 2 Tim. ii. 19. See
also Bar. 7 ; Matt. xvi. 24. Clem. 23 ; James i. 5-7, 2 Peter iii. 4.
Clem. 47 ; 1 Cor. i. 12.

78 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
the sense of several sayings of Christ regarding cross-
bearing, which implies the hatred and avoidance of
evil, sums up the whole in a paraphrase — " As the
Son of God says, ' Let us resist all iniquity, and hate
it. ' " This quotation is a specimen of others of the
same character, of which it may be said, " Ex uno
disce omnes." It may be compared with a similar
citation in the Acts of the Apostles of a written or of
an unwritten saying of Christ — " And to remember
the words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, It is more
blessed to give than to receive."* Both agree in
their form, which is a paraphrase of Scripture, or, in
the latter case, the citation of an oral tradition, but
they differ in their formulas of quotation, and espe
cially in the tense of the verb. This difference of
tense, however, which might appear to represent the
one as a past oral utterance of the Lord, the other as
a written and present saying, gives no support to the
mythical theory of Strauss, which denies the proper
date of the gospels, because we find the same tenses
interchanged in the quotations made by the Fathers
from both the Old and New Testaments.f
5. Allusion is of even more interest and importance
in connection with patristic than with Scripture quota
tion, which is so complete and cogent that an array of
* Acts xx. 35.
t Clem. 46 ; Matt. xxvi. 24. Clem. 36 ; Ps. ii. 7, 8. Clem. 18 ;
Ps. Ixxxviii. 21, 1 Sam. xiii. 14. Clem. 56 ; Prov. iii. 11, Heb. vi.
9-11. Clem. 30; 1 Peter v. 5. 2 Clem. 5 ; Matt. x. 16. 2 Clem. 8 ;
Matt. xii. 50. 2 Clem. 6 ; Luke xvi. 13.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 79
references is less valuable. The quotations made by
the Fathers are generally less definite, both in their
formulas and forms, and more in need of the support
of reliable allusions. Lardner and others, without any
reason assigned, have employed these terms indiscrimi
nately as of equal value. But it is evident that they
are formally , if not alway really different, and of differ
ent apologetic value. There are three forms and grades
of allusion in the New Testament and in the Fathers
— general, special, and literal ; to the general idea, to
the substance, and to the exact form of the text, the last
of which only can be said to be tantamount to a formal
quotation. But even in the winding maze of allusion
a guiding principle may be supplied. Ignatius espe
cially alludes in all these forms to the gospels, which
he styles in their unity " the gospel." He also alludes
to the Epistle to the Ephesians, which he calls Paul's,
as Clement does the First Epistle to the Corinthians.
We may therefore lay it down as a general rule — that
allusions, elsewhere found as formal citations, or made
to documents which can be otherwise proved to have
had contemporaneous existence, and to have been
known and accepted by the writers, rise especially in
their literal form to the value of express quotations.
(1.) We may here review the ground traversed on
the field of patristic literature and the results gained.
We have not quoted the doubtful or supposititious
writings ascribed to these Fathers, such as the Second
Epistle of Clement of Rome to the Corinthians and
the whole seven epistles of the shorter recension of

80 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
Ignatius. We have followed the Syriac version, which
contains three only of this number, the epistles to the
Ephesians, to the Romans, and to Polycarp, which are
unquestionably authentic and authoritative evidence
not only of the authenticity of the New Testament, but
of the way in which the Fathers cited it.
We have found a progression in the quotation for
mulas, according to which the authors or the books of
the New Testament are more frequently and more
distinctly named in the later than in the earlier
Fathers. There is a gradual advance from the general
to the particular, from the citation of Scripture to some
particular writing or writer. This is accompanied by
a corresponding clearness and fullness of the forms of
quotation, which a similar examination of the post-
Apostolic Fathers would show to be also progressive.
Throughout these formulas and forms are the same in
kind but different in degree. Both are closely con
nected and illustrated by a similar parallel in the
nomenclature of the evangelical writings. The term
gospel is applied in the New Testament, in Church
history, and in modern use to the whole doctrine of
grace or of Christ in the Christian revelation. Now,
as the writings of the evangelists were produced
separately, at different times, and by different writers,
they would doubtless be called, as they were severally
known and accepted, gospels singly, such as Matthew's
or Mark's Gospel. But we have nowhere any ancient
historical evidence or indication that only a single one
of the four gospels was in use or was known to exist

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 81
separately.* The Churches are represented as possess
ing the entire collection of the four gospels, which,
with special reference to their internal character as a
fourfold revelation of grace, were first styled, " The
Gospel," and then subsequently, and more specifically,
with regard to their external unity as a collection,
" The Gospels," or, " The Holy Quaternion of the Gos
pels," and " The Memoirs of Christ."
It is also evident that not only the variety of allu
sions in the New Testament and in the Fathers, but
also occasionally the form of the quotations, are due to
memory. Copies were scarce both of the Old and
New Testaments, which were more in men's minds
than in their hands. The use of memory may have
also led to the occasional confusion of tradition with
Scripture, observed especially in Barnabas, and to the
quotation of the Apocrypha as authoritative.
(2.) We have also seen that the Fathers of the apos-1
tolic era interpreted Scripture on substantially the
same rational principles as the authors of the New
Testament, except the vicious method of allegorising,
with which some of them were tainted, the result of
the application of Oriental philosophy to Christianity.
The errors of Barnabas — an Apostolic Father, contem
porary with Ignatius and Polycarp, if not an apostolic
man, the Barnabas of Scripture — sprang from the abuse
of a right principle, the symbolic or typical, con
spicuous in Scripture, and carried to excess in the
symbolism of the East. It is also worthy of notice
* Olshausen, Comment, on Gospels. Introduction. F

82 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
that this writer, whose name reveals his nationality,
sometimes cited, like the inspired writers, the Hebrew
rather than the Septuagint, the common source of
quotation. In both cases this was done because it
best answered the purposes of the writers.
(3.) We even find a parallel between New Testament
and patristic quotation in those more doubtful and
difficult instances which are nowhere formally found,
the source of which we must either seek in the sub
stance of Scripture, or in tradition, or in special reve
lation. The following citation of Barnabas, already
adduced — " As the Son of God hath said, ' Let us
resist all iniquity, and hate it ' " — seems to embody
the substance of several texts ; while Luke's notice of
the signal saying of the Lord, " It is more blessed to
give than to receive,"'57 rather appears to be one of
those traditional and well-known words of Jesus which
were too numerous to be recorded. The only citation
of any sort in Hernias — " The Lord is nigh to them
that turn to Him, as it is written in Heldam and
Modal, who prophesied to the people in the wilder
ness " — is evidently taken from a written tradition,
though the same sentiment pervades the Pentateuch.f
Jude's citation of a prophecy of Enoch regarding the
coming of the Lord, not found in Scripture, was
derived either from the apocryphal book of Enoch,
which is a written tradition, or from direct revelation.!
We sum up these observations by repeating that
* Acts xx. 35. t Hermas; Num. xi. 26 27. J Jude 14, 15.

PATRISTIC QUOTATION. 83
the canonical writers and the Fathers substantially
agree in their forms of citation, and that the differ
ence of their principles of interpretation and applica
tion confirms the authority of the former, and finds
its proper explanation only in the differential principle
of inspiration. Section Fourth.
Corresponding forms of citation might be reproduced
in order from the ante-Nicene Fathers, such as Justin
Martyr, the great apologist of Christianity, Irenseus of
Lyons, Theophilus of Antioch, and Clement and Origen
of Alexandria ; but as their evidence does not bear so
directly as that of the Apostolic Fathers on a collateral
department of our subject, the authenticity of the
books of the New Testament, we merely submit for
examination a table of reference.* It is evident that
the prosecution of the method of adducing instances
throughout the long line of the post-Nicene Fathers,
Eastern and Western, Greek and Latin, the latter of
whom cited the Vulgate, which is the version of a
version, downwards to the scholastic writers, and on-

* Substantial Quotation — as Justin Apol. i. p. 75 ; Luc. i. 31. Just.
Dial. p. 64 ; John xiv. 24. Just. Dial. p. 301 ; Matt. xxv. 41. Iren.
Heer. lib. iii. c. 4 ; Acts xv. 39, and xvi. 8-11. Iren. lib. i. c. 16 ;
2 John 10, 11. Theoph. Autoly. lib. iii. ; Rom. xiii. 7, 8. Theoph. Aut.
lib. iii. ; Matt. v. 28, 44.
Paraphrase — Just. Dial. p. 316 ; John i. 20, 27. Clem. Alex. Strom.
lib. i. p. 346 ; Matt. vi. 33. Paid. lib. ii. p. 100 ; John vi. 53, 54. Strom.
lib. iv. p. 511 ; Phil. iv. 5.

84 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
wards to the Reformation and to modern times, were
a task tedious and almost interminable. But we also
find in these Fathers and schoolmen the same forms of
quotation as in the New Testament and the earliest
Fathers, accompanied with a growing tendency or gra
dual progress towards more literal or formal exactness.
A Kempis renders the Vulgate of Job, " Malitia est
vita hominis super terram," thus, " Tentatio est vita
humana super terram." He combines and cites two
passages from Ezekiel in this form — " Vivo ego, dicit
Dominus, qui nolo mortem peccatoris, sed magis ut
convertatur et vivat, quoniam peccatorum suorum non
recordabor amplius, sed cuncta sibi indulta erunt."*
The following passage, " Iniquitates mese supergressse
sunt caput meum et sicut onus grave gravatse sunt
super me," is thus condensed and quoted by Aquinas,
" Iniquitates meae aggravates sunt super me."! It is
also clear that the rationale of the forms of quotation
lies mainly in these two pervading and regulating
principles — the purpose of the writers, whether strictly
demonstrative or merely didactic, or even devotional,
and the accessibility of .the sources of quotation.
Hence, when their object was logical, their citations
were more literal ; when merely didactic, they were
more free ; while the rarity of copies of the Scriptures,
prior to the completion or recognition of the New
Testament Canon, and the multiplication and circula-
* A. Kem.lib. i cap. 13 ; Job vii. 1. Lib. iv. cap. 7 ; Ezek. xxxiii. 11,
Ezek. xviii. 22.
t Aquin. in Matt. cap. 6 ; Ps. xxxviii. 4.

MODERN QUOTATION. 80
tion of the Divine Oracles, threw them back, in a
great measure, on their memories, which were satu
rated with Scripture. And, accordingly, the learned
and devout Calvin, in his numerous letters, lately
edited by Jules Bonnet, cites the Scriptures at once
for the same purposes and in the same manner as the
Fathers and the authors of the New Testament. He
quotes the Epistle to the Romans thus : " Paul,
treating of charity, does not forget that we ought to
weep with those that weep."* The well-known text,
" I know in whom I have believed," he thus para
phrases, without naming the author or the epistle :
" You can say, with that valiant champion of Jesus
Christ, ' I know from whom I have received my
faith.' "f His third letter is full of allusions, but does
not contain a single formal citation.^ The letters of
Samuel Rutherford, in more modern times, written in
similar circumstances, exhibit like forms of quotation. §
He thus cites the substance of the well-known text of
the Christian life : "I live no more, but Christ liveth
in me." He also selects and alters the tense of the
verb of a sentence from a passage in the Psalms, " I
bless the Lord who gave me counsel." In like manner
he says that Christ's saints bear, " as the apostle saith,
the remnants or leavings of the cross." The follow
ing citation is a synthesis of several passages : " Thank
* Calvin's Letters, vol. i p. 295 ; Rom. xii 15.
+ Letters, vol. i. p. 389 ; 2 Tim. i 12. See also Calv. Sacs. p. 8,
Gal. iii 27, 1 Cor. xii. 13 ; and p. 10, Ps. cxix. 10, Ps. cxi. 1 ; p. 164,
John vi. 56 ; p. 178, 1 Cor. xi. 27, 27.
t Letters, p. 382. § Letters, p. 196 ; Gal. ii. 20.

86 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
your God, who saith, ' I have the keys of hell and of
death — I kill, and I make alive. The Lord bringeth
down to the grave and bringeth up.' "* These
numerous but short letters, written in prison to friends
for devotional and hortatory purposes, are full of
formal citations, most of which are literal and of
literal allusions equal to quotations. Owen, in his
dogmatic and apologetical writings, cites the Scrip
tures in the same way. In the following citation
the form of the original text is slightly altered,
but the substance remains : " He hath also committed
all judgment unto Him, that all men might honour
Him, even as they honour the Father." f He thus
paraphrases the principle of legal obedience, " Do and
live ; " and the principle of the legal curse, " Cursed be
every transgressor." J We find also that philosophers
as well as theologians follow the same mode of quota
tion. Bacon, the father of inductive philosophy, and
the connecting link between the scholastic philosophers
and those of the Reformation, thus freely renders
Christ's reply to the captious Pharisees, " The phy
sician approaches the sick rather than the whole." §
The learned and accurate Grotius cites Paul in the
former of the following passages almost exactly, but in
the latter quite loosely : " For if we believe that Jesus
died and rose again, even so them that are asleep will
* Letters, p. 266 ; Rev. i. 18, Deut. xxxii. 39, Ps. xxii. 15.
t Owen's Essays, p. 142, John v. 21-27 ; and p. 250, 1 John iii. 2.
J Owen's Essays, p. 44, with Gal. iii. 12 and Gal. iii. 10 ; and
p. 153 with Gal. i. 8-10.
§ Bacon's Essays, p. 144 ; Matt. ix. 12.

QUOTATION OF THE CLASSICS. 87
God bring with Him ; " and, " All things fall out for
the best to those who purely worship God." * The
celebrated Butler not only quotes occasionally from the
original instead of from the authorised version, .but
also modifies and adjusts the passage cited to his
own text.f We shall merely add that similar forms
of citation pervade the secular and religious productions
of the modern pen, press, and pulpit.
Section Fifth.
1. But it is more pertinent to our subject to notice
the way in which the philosophers, mediaeval and
modern, cite the Greek and Roman classics. Livy's
character of Scipio Africanus, " Memorabilior prima
pars vita? quam postrema fuit," is thus paraphrased
by Bacon, " Ultima primis cedebant."| The same
writer's eulogy of Marcus Porcius Cato, " In hoc viro
tanta vis animi ingeniique fuit, ut quocunque loco
natus esset, fortunam sibi ipse facturus fuisse vide-
retur," he quotes substantially, " In hoc viro tanta vis
animi et ingenii inerat, ut quocunque loco natus esset
sibi ipse fortunam facturus videretur."§ In the same
way Spartian's account of the life of Septimus Severus,
" Juventutem egit erroribus, imo furoribus, plenam,"
* Grotius, Epis. Consol ; 1 Thess. iv. 14, Rom. viii. 28.
f Analogy, part i. cap. 2, and part ii. cap. 4 ; Prov. i. 28, 1 Peter
i. 11, 12. See Newt. Cardiph. vol. ii. p. 251 ; vol. i p. 70 ; vol. i.
p. 26.
£ Bacon's Essays, p. 95 ; Liv. xxxvii. 53.
§ Advanc. Learn, p. 177 ; Liv. xxxix. 40.

88 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
is thus altered and rendered, " Juventam plenam
furorum nonunquam et criminum habuit."*
This is the connecting link between ecclesiastical
and classical citation, both of which exhibit the two
general principles of scriptural quotation, the literal
and the loose. We meet with like citation formulas
as — " Apud Virgilium," " Apud Livium," " Ut ait
Cicero," " Horatius fingil," " Quale est Sallustii," " In
tertio de Oratore ita Scriptum est," " Cicero ad Brutum
dicit," "Homerus ait."f
The citations themselves are generally literal, but
often free. Neither the classical historians, nor even
the classical poets cite each other with verbal accuracy.
In the case of the latter, the prosody is certainly
always preserved, but the words are sometimes altered,
a word of the same quantity being put for another.
Quintilian, the rhetorician, substitutes in citing the
following line of Virgil nwm for nunc\ —
" Num. qtiis te, juvenilia confidentissime 1 "
In another citation we find one for nunc —
" Heu, quae me tellus, inquit, queeme requora possunt accipere ? "
In the following passage —
" Adduiit in spatia, et frustra retinacula tendens,"

* Essays, p. 94 ; Spart. Vit. Sev. P. 144 ; Virg. Mn. xii. 600.
Advanc. of Learn, p. 2 ; Tac. xiii 3. Essays, p. 95 ; Cic. Brut. 95.
f Quint, lib. ix. 1 ; Cic. de Oratore, lib. iii. 53. Quint, lib. xi. 1 ;
Cic. de Orat. lib. iii. 55.
J Quint, lib. ix. p. 136 ; Virg. Georg. iv. 445.

WRITTEN REPORTING. 89
we find in Virgil —
" Addunt se in spatia, frustra retinacula tendens."*
Such instances of quotation from the poets by poets,
philosophers, and historians might be multiplied.
Even Quintilian, who dealt with words and discussed
sentences, reckoned it sufficient in citing poetry to
retain the sense and to maintain the integrity of the
verse. In the same author we have this formal
citation from Cicero ad Brutum, " Nam eloquentiam,
qua? admirationem non habet, nullam judico."f In
all the extant letters of the Roman Orator to Brutus
this quotation is nowhere formally to be found, but
we find the substance of it in the following passage,
regarding the eloquent Messalla : " Cave enim, exis-
times, Brute, . . . ut eloquentia, qua mirabiliter
excellit, vix in eo locum ad laudandum habere vide-
atur." J
2. We conclude the subject of analogous quotation
by a reference to written reporting, between which and
written citation there is a real agreement with a formal
difference. The latter is the reproduction of a record
or text, the former of a speech. Both agree in repro
ducing the substance or sense of the writing or utter
ance. Reporting, therefore, is analogous to quoting,
* Quint, lib. ix. p. 115 ; Virg. Mn. ii. 69. Lib. viii. p. 76 ; Virg.
Georg. i. 513. Also Quint, lib. viii. p. 98 ; Virg. ii. 541. Hor. Epis.
ad Pison. ; Horn. Odyss, lib. i.
t Quint, lib. viii. cap. 3.
J Cic. ad Brutum, lib. i. epis. 15.

90 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
fulfilling the same conditions. Hence the Old Testa
ment reports of the same communications, whether
made directly or indirectly, and whether to the mind or
to the ear, formally vary but substantially agree, as
may be seen by comparing Deuteronomy with Exodus
and Leviticus. The ten words, indeed, are neither a
quotation nor a report, but a copy of the original text,
written by the finger of God on tables of stone. And
yet Moses in the second book of the law gives a
version of the fourth commandment differing in
some particulars from the original form in Exodus,
and forming the basis of a new and special admo
nition."* The different reports in the gospels of the
sayings of the Lord vary in form while they agree
in sense. Even the grand Sermon on the Mount,
once only recorded, may not be the very words
of the great Teacher, of whose beautiful parables
and speeches we certainly find different reports, f
Even also the Lord's Prayer, which we might expect
to be strictly literal, is reported with some verbal
variations. J Josephus, the Jewish historian, reports
the same speeches, such as Herod's to his men of war,
with considerable variety. § Classical historians, as
Tacitus, Herodotus, and Livy, and poets, such as Hesiod,
Homer, and Ovid, merely recite the substance of judicial
* Exod. xx. 8-11 ; Deut. v. 12-15.
f Comp. Mark iv. with Luke viii. and Matt. xiii. ; and Mark iii. with
Matt. xii.
J Matt. vi. 9-14, with Luke xi. 1-4.
§ Comp. Wars of Jews, book i. cap. 19, sec. 4, with Antiq. book
xv. sec. 3.

WRITTEN REPORTING. 91
and municipal speeches and military despatches, and of
the sayings and songs of their gods and heroes, with
such prefaces as " ita," " in hunc modum," " w?,"
" ovto)9." On such occasions truthful representation,
and not verbal accuracy, was all that was required or
sought.

PAET IV.
THE FORMS OF QUOTATION.
Section First.
1. We have already found five distinct forms of quo
tation in the New Testament from the Old. We have
also discovered substantially the same forms not only
in the Old Testament, in so far as the authors of it cite
each other, but also in the earlier and later Fathers of
the Church, and throughout the long and dreary reign
of scholasticism, downwards to the Reformation. We
have also seen that the theologians and philosophers of
the reforming period and of more modern times like
wise cite both the Scriptures and the classical authors
in the same way as the New Testament. We have
traced similar forms of citation from the prose and
even from the poetry of the classics themselves. And
we concluded by noticing the point of contact between
quotation and relation, both in sacred and secular
literature. We observed that these five forms might
be reduced to two general classes, literal and loose, of
which the others were less or more modifications and
combinations. We also found a gradual progress to
wards more exact quotation, as either the subject or the
object of the authors dictated, or as their circumstances

vindication of forms. 93
made it available. Literal citation may be regarded
as the normal form, but the other forms are equally
employed, and for similar reasons — the requirements,
purposes, and facilities of the writers. And in making
their citations the authors of the New Testament and
the Fathers generally preferred the Septuagint, not only
because its forms of thought or phraseology were more
suitable to the conceptions and objects of most of the
writers, but because of the general prevalence of the
Greek language and its peculiar capability of containing
the new ideas of Christianity.
The various attempts of learned critics to account
for such forms of citation are quite inadequate. The
frequent allegation of Olshausen and others, that the
looser forms are wholly due to memory, is contrary to
evidence. Both the evangelists and the apostles in
their epistles directly quote sometimes from the Hebrew,
sometimes from the Greek, and at other times from
neither, according to the requirements of their subject.
It is still more significant that when they exactly follow
neither text, they verbally agree in many of their cita
tions, a coincidence which cannot be accounted for by
quotation from memory.""" It is evident that as similar
forms pervade alike all sacred and secular literature
they must stand or fall together. It also follows that
the attempts of certain learned Oriental scholars to
reconcile New Testament quotation with the Hebrew
text, on the basis of the various readings, or of the
* Matt. xi. 10, Luke vii. 27, Mark i 2, with Mai. iii. 1. 1 Peter ii. 6
with Rom. ix. 33.

94 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
different senses of which the text is susceptible, whether
read in its own or in the light of certain cognate
dialects, though occasionally successful, are utterly in
adequate to explain the whole phenomena. On several
passages of Scripture, indeed, they cast a shade of light
significant of alterations or applications, which scarcely
affect the integrity much less the sense of the text ;
but they neither account for all the citations of Scrip
ture, nor for the other analogous forms already adduced,
especially the classical questions, which certainly cannot
be traced to a slavish subservience to scriptural pre
cedent. All such inadequate attempts assume as
legitimate, and endeavour to impose a yoke of literalism
too heavy for our fathers and for us to bear. This
maxim of Horace must be our guiding principle —
" Nullius addiotus jurare in verba magistri."*
2. It is, therefore, evident, under all the conditions
of the problem, that the status questionis must be
determined or defined in the light of the general facts
of quotation. In this view the question is not how
any citation may have been made, whether from the
book or from memory; nor its source, whether the
Hebrew Text or the Greek version ; nor even whether
it be literal or loose. These are questions of subordi
nate importance, which by themselves neither deter
mine nor vindicate the principles of New Testament
citation. We must take our standard of quotation
not from abstract ideas of what is proper but from
* Hor. ad Msecen. lib. i 14.

VINDICATION OF FORMS. 95
facts which show that it consists in the adequate
representation or reproduction of the truth of the cited
text. The questions, therefore, involved in the discus
sion and defence of principles are the following : — Is
proper citation possible on such principles? Has it
been realised in New Testament quotation? Is the
sense of the cited Scripture fully or faithfully rendered ?
Do the quotations adequately reproduce that phase of
the text which suited the writer's subject or object?
In discussing such questions we must keep in view two
considerations of importance. As the forms of these
citations involve a corresponding sense or construction
of the text, all quotations must be examined and
vindicated in the light of the principles which regulate
both their form and sense, which imply all the ordi
nary and available resources and methods of biblical
exegesis. We must also remember that no theory can
be accepted as sufficient which is not in harmony with
the facts of all quotation. They must be all alike
defended on the same rational principles and consider
ations, which are presumed to have determined their
form and sense. The quotations of the New Testa
ment, for which we claim no special privilege on the
ground of its character, must be defended on the
principles of reason and not of inspiration.
3. The literal may be regarded as the normal or
highest form of quotation, but it were manifestly absurd
on all grounds to deny the formal validity of the other
subordinate forms which are found in Scripture. We

96 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
must not assume that verbal accuracy is the end, and
therefore the test, of all citation, and thereby reject
or except the less exact forms already advanced. We
must rather assume in any attempt at vindication that
the literary object of all quotation, sacred and secular,
is to reproduce the correct sense rather than the exact
form of the cited text. If this principle be ignored,
the true relation of words and ideas is subverted, and
the proper use of language misconceived ; truth is made
subordinate to form, and sense to sound. These forms
may be defended as legitimate on several grounds. We
might take up in order, and examine singly under
their several categories, the whole of the New Testa
ment texts, and determine whether they realise the
proper idea of quotation. This, which has been already
partially done in connection with the more difficult
citations, may be found fully, if not finally, executed in
several works of biblical exegesis. The object, how
ever, of this work is not formally to examine these
quotations one by one and to harmonise them with
their sources, but to deduce and to defend the prin
ciples on which this is to be done, and to give both
the logic of quotation and its logical application to
Christian exegesis and apologetics.
We begin, therefore, our vindication of these forms
by the question, Are the looser or freer forms mani
festly incompatible with proper citation? Are they
prima facie inadequate or insufficient to represent,
according to the design of the writer, the primary or
the secondary sense of a passage, the principal or any

VINDICATION OF FORMS. 97
subordinate idea of the cited text ? We must answer
in the negative unless we are prepared to maintain
that literal citation only is valid, and that all the other
forms, so closely woven into the tissue of all literature,
sacred and profane, are illegitimate. But we further ask,
In what respect are such forms insufficient ? Is it not
sufficient to render the substance of both the sense and
the form of a text ? or to idealise and paraphrase a pas
sage? or to extract from a text a single sentence or thread
of sentiment appropriate, to the writer's text or object?
or to represent the combined sense of several similar
passages ? Accordingly, we find such forms of citation
actually employed by writers of different ages and of
distant countries, writing in different languages, on
various subjects and in various stages of civilisation.
We must consider the logical value of this general
fact, and not allow preconceived ideas of what consti
tutes proper quotation to neutralise or to weaken its
force. We must accept and examine quotation in all
its extent, as we find it in general literature as well as
in the New Testament. The general adoption, there
fore, of such modes of citation by writers of all ages
and stages of intellectual development, must be re
garded as rational or logically right. The scholastic
maxim, as a test of truth, is applicable here, " Quod
semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus creditum fuit."
Quotation which adequately represents the sense of a
passage the general consent of the intellectual worm
declares to be founded on reason. Involving univer
sality, one of the tests of even a necessary truth, it is
G

98 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
the testimony of human reason to the validity of such
forms. They cannot be traced to mental peculiarities
or to moral prejudice. And though they cannot be
ascribed to fundamental or necessary laws of the
human mind, which, like the general forms of human
thought and language, must be followed, they com
mend themselves to human reason as being in the
circumstances valid forms of citation.
Consequently, objections made to Scripture quota
tion, being equally applicable to all quotation, not only
violate the analogy of facts and conflict with the
general judgment of mankind, but prove too much,
and therefore prove nothing.
4. But the general use of such principles of quota
tion proves them to be, not only just, but highly
expedient, or suitable to the circumstances of their
application. As applied to the text of Scripture, they
play the part of the raindrops which unfold to our
admiring gaze in the rainbow the manifold and rich
colours of the pregnant light. They show the various
forms which divine truth can assume, more wonderful
and more significant than any fabulous transformations,
without any loss or even change of its internal char
acter. They reveal a diversity in unity, and a higher
beauty in the divine word than appear in the material
world anywhere. They are keys which open the
Scripture cabinet, and display the gems and jewels
which lie encased there, to be examined and employed
to adorn the temple of the living God. They enabled

VINDICATION OF FORMS. 99
the inspired writers to apply the Scripture, not only to
the form and colour of their own text, so as to become
the weft of its warp, and to present a particular aspect
of their subject, but also to suit their special object,
whether demonstration, or doctrine, or admonition.
All these objects were more suitably accomplished by
a transformation or verbal adaptation of the form of
the text, than by an application of it which left its
form unaltered and its sense less perspicuous. All
Scripture, being theopneustic, is thus more clearly seen
to be profitable to the manifold wants of humanity."""
Such considerations of expediency not only afford a
defence of the principles of quotation, but a better
explanation of the alternate and apparently capricious
use and disuse of the Septuagint in citation, than can
be found in any known analogical relations or spiritual
principles. We do not find that this celebrated version
is used or disused, according to its agreement or dis
agreement with the Hebrew. On the contrary, it is
alternately used when it differs from the original, and
disused when it agrees with it.f But if the specific
object of the writers was to exhibit the fulness of
Scripture, or to present it under a particular form for
a special purpose, such irregularity was not only
natural, but necessary, both in regard to the Septuagint
and the Hebrew, between which, in this respect, there
is no difference. This is, however, rather a mere
literary curiosity in itself, than a question of principle,
as affecting the inspiration and authority of Scripture
* 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17. t Matt, xxvii. 9, 10, and John xv. 25.

100 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
except when the Greek version faithfully renders the
Hebrew, to which we advert in the proper place.
5. These principles of quotation, thus vindicated on
grounds both of reason and utility, may be applied in
proof of the justness of the citations themselves. If
the principles on which they are made be right and
defensible, it will follow that the quotations are pro
bably or presumptively correct representations of the
cited text or truth. A right principle may, indeed,
be misapplied, but a just form of thought or principle
of reason, tends to regulate and determine its own
application. We would, therefore, expect to find these
quotations to be substantially correct, merely on the
a priori ground of the principles on which they are
made. And if they can be further shown, on a posteriori
grounds, by a critical analysis of their character, to
realise the proper and proposed idea of quotation, we
need not, in the present unsettled and imperfect con
dition of biblical criticism, be either startled or stag
gered by a few apparent anomalies or discrepancies,
much less propound or parade them as misquotations
and palpable disproofs of the inspiration and authority
of the New Testament. Thus, the different forms of
quotation afford us inductive principles, which we may
carry in our minds and apply as keys to assist in
unlocking the mysteries of the several forms. And if
in any instance they prove inadequate, reason requires
us to review our principles, rather than condemn the
citations as inaccurate. And since the forms of so

VINDICATION OF FORMS. 101
many can be explained and vindicated, we may con
clude that others, not yet solved, are still not insoluble.
We would merely add that any remaining difficulties
may be solved, or at least objections be silenced, by the
following considerations. The generally recognised
Hebrew text may not be in every instance genuine, or
the original text of Scripture. We have ample evi
dence of its general integrity, but not of its absolute
verbal accuracy or identity, as the authorised recension
of some ancient prophet or inspired apostle. The
various readings of ancient Scripture, though they
neither affect the substance of revelation nor the prin
ciples of quotation, certainly solve some of its formal
divergencies arising from the similarity of letters, which
have occasionally been interchanged.* Besides, we
ought to make the same allowance for occasional
obscurity in the sense of the ancient Scriptures as of
the ancient classics, on the text of which we expend
endless time and toil of revision and translation, rather
than convict the authors of absurdity, of false prosody,
or of improper idiom. The candour and caution, also,
of true philosophy forbid a priori conclusions and
precipitate judgments, founded on a narrow basis of
evidence; and require us to await fresh elements of
solution here, as in all scientific difficulties, seeming
anomalies, and even contradictions. No existing literary
or philosophical or scientific system, nothing but the
exact sciences themselves, can abide the crucial test of
* Comp. Acts xiii. 41, with Hab. i. 5 ; and the Heb. of Ps. xix. 13,
with Sept.

102 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
perfect harmony or self-consistency, from the abnormal
phenomena of physical science upwards, to the apparent
contradictions of natural and revealed theology, the
anomalies of moral science, and the antinomies of
rational philosophy. There are many things on earth,
as well as in heaven, not yet written down in our
philosophies, none of which on these subjects can be
said to be exhaustive, homogeneous, and self-harmonious.
Moreover, expositors may certainly be wrong in their
attempts to harmonise the citations of the New Testa
ment' with the Hebrew text, as they have been in their
harmonies of the gospels, and of science with revelation.
Their exegesis is not to be regarded as final, nor their
imperfect success to be ascribed to inaccurate citation.

Section Second.
We proceed from principles of quotation to prin
ciples of interpretation, the mutual relation of which
has been already indicated. The former are in a great
measure conditioned and characterised by the latter,
the discussion of which involves principles both of
revelation and of interpretation, which go together.
Hermeneutical principles are founded chiefly on the
revelation principles of progression and unity already
stated. Any defence of these principles must assume
that the Old Testament was rationally written, and is
therefore to be rationally interpreted. We must deal
with it from the critical stand-point of reason, and not
from the theological stand-point of inspiration. It

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 103
must be shown that the apostles reasonably interpreted
what the prophets reasonably wrote. Revelation,
though not the outcome of reason, but founded on
the basis of a divine delivery, direct or indirect, of
supernatural facts and doctrines, must be rationally ex
pounded, and all principles of interpretation be ration
ally vindicated. It does not claim to be exempted
from, rational interpretation because based upon hyper-
physical phenomena, or phenomena due to direct
divine interposition, sometimes singly efficient, some
times coefficient, and at other times merely counteractive
of natural powers, but in every case the incoming of a
new power or cause, resulting either in a higher effect
of the same kind, or in a new effect of another kind,
such as the miracles of the dividing of the sea, or of
the resurrection of Lazarus. New Testament quota
tion must therefore be handled and defended in the
same way as ecclesiastical and classical citation.
1. The psychological principle, which is the com
mon basis of all other principles, and the general
stand-point of which they are merely special views,
can scarcely be said to need vindication. The inter
preters of any text or record ought to look at it from
the author's view-point, to see it with his eyes, to
enter into his conception, so as to be in full sympathy
with him and his objects. They must read any book
or passage of Scripture, in the light of the writer's
thought, gathered from his own context and from his
tory, and not in the light of anything external to the

104 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
text, whether an abstract principle or a formulated
creed of the Church, or even a concrete truth of Scrip
ture. The neglect of this condition of all sound
interpretation accounts for much of the partial, party-
coloured, and perverse exegesis by which Scripture has
been disfigured and defamed.
2. The grammatical principle is the first law of all
interpretation, and though it may appear self-evident,
and in no need of vindication, it has been widely con
troverted and counteracted. It is equally applicable
to literal and to tropical texts, both of which are to be
interpreted grammatically, according to the proper
sense of the words in the circumstances. This sense,
whether literal, tropical, or typical, is always one and
not many, even when it combines two correlated and
analogous though disparate subjects. It is one even
when twofold, with a double reference to two similar
subjects, and not double, both literal and figurative,
and therefore the principle of interpretation is also
one, the philological or grammatical, and not double,
both literal and allegorical. Otherwise, on any other
method of interpretation, if this first principle of
language were violated and the usus loquendi
disregarded, the formation and philosophy of lan
guage would become impracticable, and its interpre
tation so irregular and uncertain as to be impossible.
Other principles, whether employed singly or con
jointly, have run to such excess of riot as to explode
themselves, and to leave the true principle conspicuous

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 105
and commanding as a column amid a heap of ruins.
The history of the application of a principle is the
witness of its truth or its absurdity. Thus tested,
philological interpretation, on the broad basis of
grammar and not of narrow literalism, is vindicated
as the only rational and reliable principle. All Scrip
ture is interrogated and interpreted by the authors of
the New Testament upon this principle, the violence
of which has occasioned the extremes of rationalism
and allegorical mysticism so conspicuous in Rabbinical
literature and in both ancient and modern Church
dogma. The Jewish doctors allegorised the literal and
literalised the allegorical, producing negative morality,
rational theology, and Christology without the cross.
The opposite ecclesiastical schools of Alexandria and
Antioch, represented respectively by Origen and Theo
dore of Mopsuestia, were founded on these two con
flicting principles of interpretation. The former
attributed to Scripture three elements — the literal,
the moral, and the mystical, the 'last of which con
tained two senses, the analogical and the anagogical.
Theodore dwelt almost exclusively on the letter of
Scripture, which he thereby rationalised, assigning to
the ancient prophecies a merely literal, logical, and
present application. These counter-tendencies, after
having produced and pervaded the rationalism and
mysticism of the scholastic period, and been repudiated
by the reformers of the sixteenth century, reappeared
in the writings of Grotius and Cocceius, and still
appear in modern Christian spiritualism, especially in

106 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
Swedenborgianism, and in the many but kindred forms
of rationalism and literal millenarianism. Extremes,
first seen in operation in the ancient pagan, Jewish,
and ecclesiastical schools, are found, after having run
their long and divergent course, to meet in an un
natural and arbitrary interpretation of Scripture, con
trary to the great philological principle of New
Testament exegesis, which not only recognises both the
historical truth or literal sense of the text and its
deeper spiritual significance, but combines the latter
with the former as its natural basis.
3. As the interpretative principles of analogy and
type rest on a common basis of similitude, we shall
pave the way for their vindication by developing and
defining the various kindred forms or figures of speech
under which it appears. The Scripture abounds with
symbols, both things and words, the ground of which
in every form is similitude, real or apparent. The
metaphor, based on the resemblance between two
things, which image one another, is manifestly the
germ of all symbolism, whether single or sustained.
Even in such figures as synecdoche, where a part
represents the whole ; or metonymy, where the effect
stands for the cause; or personification, where per
sonal properties are ascribed to impersonal things,
there are not only the ideas of coexistence and of
causal connection, but an underlying basis of real or of
phenomenal resemblance between part and whole,
between the nature of the cause and the nature of the

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 107
consequent, and between a person and the thing per
sonified. The language also of the enigma, such as Samson's
riddle of the honey in the carcase of the lion, is not
necessarily figurative ; but it covers a mystical mean
ing by being purposely indefinite and obscure.* But
similitude is manifestly the ground of all allegory and
analogy, proverb, parable, and type employed in the
communication or in the elucidation of truth. These
are all intimately related, not only in their principle,
but in their structure and uses.
Analogy, in the form of logical comparison, implies
a radical correspondence or agreement between things
or thoughts, whereby we can reason from the one to
the other, or predicate the same things regarding
them. Such analogy pervades the Scriptures, and is
the principle of many quotations. f
Allegory, as David's vine brought out of Egypt, and
planted in the land of Canaan, the Song of Solomon,
Isaiah's song of the fertile vineyard, Paul's representa
tion of the two covenants under the emblems of Hagar
and Sarah, and our Lord's figure of the vine and
branches, is simply a sequence of continuous meta
phor, or a series of set and sustained symbolism,
representing generally, under the form of fiction, but
sometimes of fact, the spiritual principles of the king
dom of God. This definition is justified both by its
* Judges xiv. 14.
t Ps. Ixxx. 8-16; Isa. v. 1-8; Gal. iv. 22-28. " «Viv« iem iXXti-
lyogovfistu."

108 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
etymology"' and by its use, which declare it to be an
extended trope, by which one thing is expressed and
another thing resembling it is meant.
Parable and proverb are closely connected with one
another, and with the figures already defined.f The
same Hebrew word covers both, which contain in com
mon the ideas of similitude and comparison.^ They
are figurative sayings, single and complex respec
tively, involving comparison on the ground of simili
tude. The parable has two forms, a developed and
an undeveloped form. In the former it is substan
tially a historical allegory, or figurative representation
of things wont to happen, for moral purposes, but
more complete in form and more definite in signifi
cance than mere allegory. In the latter form, as
applied to a concrete case, or derived from it, it is a
figurative comparison between two things, which, from
its form and sense, naturally becomes or passes into
a proverb, as is seen in the writings of Solomon, and
other proverbial sayings of Scripture.^ Hence the
Greek biblical equivalents correspond,|| the one com
pletely to the generic Hebrew word in all its uses,
and the other to the proverb specifically, which means
* ak^os, and ocyo^iuu.
t 2 Sam. xii. 1-6 ; Ps. lxxviii. 2, with Matt. xiii. 13, 35 ; Judges ix.
7-15 ; Luke xii. 41 ; Matt. xiii. 18-24, 31, 33, 36, 53 ; Matt. xxi. 33, 45 ;
Mark iv. 10, 13 ; Mark vii. 17 ; Mark xii. 12 ; Luke viii. 9, 11 ; Luke
xiii. 6 ; Luke xv. 3 ; Luke xviii. 1, 9 ; Luke xix. 11 ; Luke xx. 19.
J tab T T
§ Proverbs passim, and Luke iv. 23.
|| tfa,(>(z{ho\ft, and tfetgoifAia.

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 109
in all languages a saying of common use, or maxim of
common life, coming forward in common conversation,
and involving a comparison between things, such as,
" Physician, heal thyself," and " The labourer is worthy
of his hire."* Hence, also, these words are used
synonymously in the Greek of the Old and New Tes
taments, and specially in John's Gospel,! the parable
in a particular form becoming proverbial, and the pro
verb parabolic, as involving in its concrete form com
parison. And as all figures or symbols are less or
more obscure, half-concealing, half-revealing, both the
proverbs and the parables of Scripture are veiled or
hidden, and, as such, employed for special purposes.
Together, they combine the ideas of resemblance and
comparison, currency and mystery.
Analogy is a radical correspondence or agreement
between things or thoughts, whereby we can reason
from the one to the other, or predicate the same
things regarding them. It pervades the Scriptures,
and is the principle of many quotations. There is a
real agreement between the facts adduced, the prin
ciples involved, and the doctrines taught. Herein it
differs generally from tropes, allegories, and parables,
where there is similarity of form, but no unity of prin
ciple, while it specially agrees with the type. These
homologous facts furnish moral principles and spiritual
truths, which were applied by the Apostles to the cor
responding facts and principles which emerged under
the new economy. They have no prospective signi-
* Luke iv. 23. t «=£»',"«<, John x. 6 ; John xvi. 25, 29.

110 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
ficance by themselves, like the types, in virtue of
their peculiar form or place in the divine economy,
though they sustain the same relation to the unifor
mity of the divine moral government and the pro
gressive evolution of the divine redemptive work. As
a principle of interpretation, it is as undeniable, and
as reliable, as the uniformity both of nature and of the
divine moral government, and as the manifest pro
gression of revelation and of the work of redemption.
It is in its principle logically as true as that things
which are equal to the same thing are equal to one
another, and, consequently, that the same things may
be predicated of both alike. Underlying unity of prin
ciple between things of events involves logical inference
from the one to the other, and the legitimate applica
tion made in quotation.
Moreover, if the logic of analogy be denied we must
also renounce induction from classified analogous facts,
which involve a common principle of agreement, and
thus at once subvert the new method of the sciences
and arrest all scientific discovery and advancement.
Logic, also, would become limited to deduction from
assumed primary or secondary truths, in which the
conclusion is merely an evolution of the premises, and
available only for the defence of realised or of reputed
truth, according to the method of Aristotle, so long
and so injuriously applied to theology. Even pure
logic, or the science of the harmony of thought, and
the exact sciences themselves, would become discre
dited, because logic which could not be applied in

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. Ill
sustained reasoning to the same truths, quantities,
and relations of things, could not be formally self-
harmonious ; and being thus incapable of verification,
could only be regarded as an unmeaning formula, a
treacherous light leading to the vortex of absolute
scepticism where nothing can be known.
4. The facts of analogy with the principles involved
meet and merge in the type, which is accordingly
defined in Scripture as being generally an analogous
instance or example, either for imitation or for warn
ing.* They both rest upon an ultimate basis of fact
or reality, in which they differ from metaphor, allegory,
and parable, which may rest on mere resemblance.
In all these forms of thought or speech we must deal
first with the words, and next with the things denoted
by them, which in turn represent higher truths or
realities. But the form of the trope is figurative, the
allegory is generally both fictitious and figurative, the
parable is literal in language but figurative in thing,
and rests generally on a basis of wonted fact, in which
it coincides with analogy and type.
It follows that the things denoted by example,
shadow, and type are analogous.! The first denotes
the mechanical pattern or rough outline of heavenly
things, the second its spiritual significance, and the
third both together. The significance of the type in
the New Testament may be thus developed. The
generic or primary sense is a stroke or blow, then the
* 1 Cor. X. 11. 1" vnobuyp.a., trxtd, rviros.

112 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
mark or impression so produced.* The more specific
senses f are a figure or pattern of things or persons
present, a material or a moral model according to
which they are to be conformed. J Then, next, it
becomes a prospective sign or shadow of things or
persons to come, or still more generally of the charac
ters and relations, official rather than personal, of men,
as of Adam and Melchesedec, who were types of Christ.
It is thus evident that the type proper in its full
form is an accomplished fact or transaction, involving
and presenting a present principle or truth, which is
not merely a symbol, but a sample of higher truth to
be revealed. This definition completely realises the
New Testament idea of the whole Mosaic ritual, and of
the historical types of every kind and grade, as being
collectively shadows of better things to come, of which
Christ is the body. § The types, not merely as acted
but as written, are not figures of speech nor historical
records, but the literal records of facts or events, con
taining a present truth, the sample of an ultimate
truth, its counterpart or complement. The first duty,
therefore, of the critic is to find the type and then
the antitype. We may find the former apart from the
.latter, the present involute or truth of a fact apart
* John xx. 25 — <rinos.
f Acts vii. 44 ; Amos v. 26 ; Acts xxiii. 25 ; Rom. vi. 17 ; Phil. iii.
17 ; 1 Thess. i. 7 ; 2 Thess. iii. 9 ; 1 Tim. iv. 12 ; Titus ii. 7 ; 1 Peter
v. 3.
X Rom. v. 14 ; Heb. vii. 3. Melchesedec, " &<pufiomfi>vt,s rS iii nv
ttiv "• — the Son of God being both architype and antitype.'
. § Heb. x. 1.

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 113
from its ulterior development, but we cannot deter
mine the latter apart from the former or primary
principle. It is not necessary to decide, in connection
with any investigation into type or prophecy, how far
the divine element or idea was realised by either the
recipient or the writer of the revelation, because such
knowledge of the divine design is not necessary to
the prophetic character of any communications. The
human authors of both type and prophecy sometimes
wrote or spoke without foresight, sometimes without
knowledge, and sometimes even against their will. *
5. The proper or plenary definition of the type
contains all its elements or properties, which may be
thus evolved in order. We have already seen that
there lies between type and antitype a real unity of
idea, which excludes all fanciful allegory and baseless
analogy by which the literature of the subject is dis
figured, showing that mere resemblances have been
mistaken for realities, and that a lawless imagination
has framed types where rational criticism could not
find them. This continuity of idea enables us to
thread our way through the long and obscure vista of
type and countertype, which are found to be merely
different forms and degrees of the same truth.
It follows, also, that types have a special significance,
the ultimate corresponding to the present typical truth,
which also like typical prophecies may be fulfilled in
more than in one of the stages and departments of the
* Gaussen on Insp. p. 284. Transl. 1850. H

114 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
kingdom of God, all of which are closely related and
pervaded by common principles. Their relations, ac
cordingly, are seen to be fixed and determinate, even
in the only two instances in which they might appear
to be interchangeable, in the one of which the taber
nacle is said to be the antitype, not of the heavenly
temple, but of the prior type or pattern shown to
Moses on the mount, of which heaven is the real
antitype ; and in the other Christian baptism is pre
sented as at once the countertype of the waters of
the flood, as a medium of preservation, and as the
type of regeneration and remission of sins.* More
over, the ancient types are not only founded on
facts or transactions, but upon facts generally of a
very signal and significant character, and upon the
more special arrangements of divine wisdom for the
advancement of the scheme of revelation and redemp
tion. The chief of these were the typical relation of
Adam, as the federal head of all mankind, to Christ,
the covenant Head of redeemed humanity ; the
Abrahamic covenant, involving the coming of Christ
and the calling of the Gentiles ; the deliverance of the
chosen seed from Egypt, and their introduction into
Canaan; their subsequent redemption from captivity
in Babylon; together with not only several other
subservient transactions or events, but more especially
with the whole Mosaic ritual, which is expressly inter
preted as a shadow of better things to come.f Accord
ingly, these outstanding historical and ritual types
* Heb. viii. 5 ; 1 Peter iii. 21. f Heb. x. 1.

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 115
alike possess not only a special significance, but a
peculiar and prominent form, having a special and
distinct evangelical counterpart. Their particular forms,
which embody a divine idea, when read in connection
both with their appointment as events or institutions,
and with the prophecies and promises with which they
are generally associated, are shadows which forecast
ultimate realities. The typical system, therefore, was
more directly connected with the development of
divine revelation and redemption than the ordinary
events of the divine moral government, which form
the ground of analogical interpretation. The divine
revelation was thereby not only delivered here a little
and there a little, at sundry times and in diverse
manners, but also developed. The typical relations
of such persons as Adam and Melchesedec, and even
Isaac, to Christ were developed by the legal types,
which also, together with the grand redemptive events,
were still further unfolded and interpreted by the
prophecies, direct and typical, which read at once the
revelation past and future. Revelation as progressive
was developed in its delivery, and delivered in its
development, which things are merely different aspects
of the same divine self-manifestation. From the be
ginning revelation came, like redemption itself, from
God Himself, and was not an evolution, even under
divine guidance, of the contents of the human spiritual
consciousness. The Old Testament revelation, also,
like the New, of which it is the counterpart, was
founded on extraordinary events in the intercourse of

116 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
God with man, which succeeded and revealed each
other. The patriarchal dispensation, during which
there was no written revelation, because God con
versed with men, together with the subsequent de
velopment of the law and the prophets, may be re
garded as corresponding to the actual life of Jesus
Christ on earth, of which the gospels are the fourfold
memoir and the doctrinal epistles the ultimate develop
ment. Revelation, as from the first a development of
the divine word spoken or written, differs widely both
from the extraneous accretions or traditions of the
Jewish Talmud, which is a collection of merely human
dogma, and from the patristic development of doctrine,
which was made not from the divine word, but from
the subjective belief of the Church.* Accordingly,
the one development ended in a plenary or perfect-
revelation, God who spoke in past times to the fathers
having spoken unto us by His Son, the highest and final
form of His self-manifestation; the other terminated
in a tissue of truth and error, the result of various
hostile elements and influences, and in which error ulti
mately predominated in the abnormal and successive
growths of Gnosticism, Mysticism, and Romanism.
We also add that these types, to answer the design
of their appointment, must have been not only know-
able, but less or more known by spiritual Israelites,
who might have seen that the blood of animals could
not atone for human sin, because there is between
them no natural connection, much less any adequate
* See Dr. Rainy's " Delivery and Development of Doctrine."

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 117
proportion. Their form, also, as well as their sub
stance, especially as read in the light of the character
of the economy and of the divine promises, might
have been seen to forecast the future. If they had
not appeared to premtimate better things to come,
and have thereby sustained the faith and hope of the
people, they could not have fitly formed part of a
preparatory dispensation. It is essential to the char
acter both of a prophecy and of a type, which is a
silent prophecy, that at least the rude outline of their
meaning may be understood before their fulfilment.
We are expressly told that the prophets, with this
general idea in their minds, searched both the time
and the character of the times, which the Spirit of God
in them did signify when He testified beforehand the
sufferings of Christ and the glory that would follow.*
In the determination of types and prophecies we
have certainly to deal both with the divine and the
human elements embodied there, but we have, as
theologians, to do with the former more than with the
latter. It is not necessary in. any special instance to
determine precisely how far the human writers, or the
revelation people, realised the divine idea. The more
completely the human mind conceives the divine, both
in His works and in His word, the nearer does it attain
to true science; still such knowledge is not necessary
to the existence of the phenomena of nature or of re
velation, in both of which God's thoughts are not as
our thoughts, nor His ways as our ways. It is just as
* 1 Peter i. 10-12.

118 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
certain that spiritual Jews saw through the veiled face
of Moses the face of Christ, and looked steadfastly to
the end of that which is abolished, as that others,
especially of the later Jews, regarded the initial and
transitory economy as the full and final form of the
divine kingdom, and were indignant even at the idea
of innovation or of abolition.*
6. But, on the other hand, the Apostles, contemplat
ing the law from the high stand-point of the gospel,
read and rendered, as faithful interpreters, the real and
full significance of the divine truth embedded there.
This is evident from the whole tenor of their writings,
but more especially from such prominent passages as
declare that Abraham rejoiced to see the day of Christ ;
that believing Israel ate the same spiritual bread and
drank the same spiritual water as we ourselves, even
Christ the manna and the water of the desert ; that
they all died in faith, not having received the promises ;
and that the Abrahamic promise, in particular, is fulfilled
in Christ, and in the calling of the Gentiles to the fel
lowship of the gospel.! These writers put into the
vague and indefinite formulas of the law Christ, their
¦ real and full value. It is also evident that they re
garded themselves as expounding the Old Testament,
and not as accommodating it to evangelical ideas and
uses. The accommodation theory is not only inadequate
* Acts xxi 21.
f John viii. 56 ; 1 Cor. x. 1-4 ; Heb. xi. 39 ; Gal. iii. S ; Rom. iv. 16 ;
Acts iii. 25.

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 119
to explain the phenomena, but charges the authors
with culpable incapacity and disingenuity, which would
subvert at once the authenticity and the authority of
both the gospels and the epistles. It is a baseless
assumption with the view of escaping from acknow
ledged difficulties in connection with the problem of
quotation, which it encumbers rather than relieves.
We conclude this attempt to develope the proper
typical idea by remarking, that though it is a first
principle of science and theology that no more causes
natural or moral are to be admitted than are real and
necessary to explain phenomena, and though unity is
the end of all true science, the view here presented is
not only as much in harmony with the unity of revela
tion as any system of simple symbolism can be, but is
more adapted to the whole form and objects of a
rudimentary dispensation.
7. Such being the full and proper definition of the
type, its place and use in the divine revelation and in
New Testament quotation become necessary in the cir
cumstances. Neither types nor typical prophecies,
indeed, can be said to be absolutely necessary as modes,
or as component parts of a divine revelation of re
demption. The Son of God might have become the
son of man immediately on man's fall, the first-born
seed of the woman might have been the seed of pro
mise, and paradise have been no sooner lost than won.
But it is evident that the relation of the modes and
times both of revelation and of redemption might be

120 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
such as to require types, both as parts and as proofs of
better things to follow. We find, accordingly, that it
was the will of divine wisdom to throw the redemptive
work of Christ into the distant future, called " the ful
ness of the time," for reasons which, if at all discover
able, must be gathered inductively from the facts of re
demption, instead of being deduced from the attributes
of God and the general principles of His moral govern
ment. This purpose, taken in connection with the
salvation of men during the long interval, rendered a
typical system conditionally or provisionally necessary,
as part of a preparatory but progressive and unique
revelation, coupled with a gradual development of the
divine kingdom by didactic teaching and practical
training. The revealed law" of the initial kingdom
must be such as at once to instruct the Church in the
knowledge of salvation, to shut her up unto the faith
to be revealed, and to conduct her down to Christ, not
only in point of fact, but in point of faith and feeling.
And this, again, could be best effected, not merely by
direct promises and prophecies, but by a systematic
series of historical and ritual types and typical pro
phecies, founded upon facts in the experience of the
Church. Merely verbal communications, or abstract
representations of sin and holiness, atonement and
salvation, would not have been intelligible apart from
their actual delineation in historical facts and religious
rites addressed to the external senses. The types
were a kind of pictorial writing, admirably adapted to
the pupilage of the Church, aiding also not a little our

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 121
conception of divine realities, and revealing the unity
throughout of the revelation of grace both in words
and in ideas. These types, being a series of pictures
and the typical prophecies illuminated pictures, to
gether constituting a picture gallery of spiritual realities
present and prospective, were a kind of teaching
specially accommodated to the minority of the Church
and to her preparation for the antitype, or end of the
whole economy. We find a complete analogue in the
symbolic actions and parabolic representations of the
Great Teacher, by which the infancy of the New
Testament Church was educated. Types and parables
are alike adapted to babes, who need milk and not
strong meat, and must be led forwards from first
principles to perfect truths. It is, therefore, evident
that the New Testament authors would have miscon
ceived the Old if they had not interpreted the types as
they have done.
8. Type and prophecy are related, as the basis and
the towers of a building, or as a perspective view in
different degrees of elongation. The prophets appear
to have generally received their communications in the
form of mental visions, in which their utterances were
characterised by timelessness and ideality. Their
minds, in the first instance, were receptive and not
reflective ; their faculties, when stimulated by the com
munication, were constructive rather than analytic; and,
consequently, their writings are more descriptive than
distinctive. We have already shown thai they under-

122 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
stood the relative order in time of the events predicted,
but not the precise period of their accomplishment in
the progress of the divine kingdom. Their visions
were a grand perspective view of the future, which took
note of the order of events, but not of the special modes
or times of their occurrence. Their descriptions, also,
of things were ideally perfect in their form, and not
according to the measure of their form at any stage or
period of their progressive fulfilment. The grand
realities of sin and salvation, reward and penalty, were
seen and depicted in their ultimate and full results,
and not merely in their successive and modified forms.
This fact, which is most conspicuous in typical pro
phecies, such as the deliverances from Egypt and
Babylon, not only accounts for the colours of the picture,
gloomy or glowing, which appear to outshine reality,
but is in perfect harmony with the relation of type and
antitype already indicated, and with the development
of revelation and redemption.*
We have already noticed that there are two classes
of prophecy — direct and indirect ; and two kinds —
non-Messianic and Messianic. And though there may
be a difference of opinion respecting the category or
the character of particular prophecies, two distinct
classes are generally acknowledged. All prophecy,
indeed, which is fulfilled in the times and kingdom of
the Messiah, may, in this sense, be termed Messianic.
It is also admitted that Messianic prophecy consists of
* British and Foreign Evangelical Review, 1872, April and October.
Arts, i. and vi.

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 123
two kinds — direct and typical — of which the latter is
a combination of type and prophecy, made in different
ways, which need not be specified, because they must
be all expounded and defended on the same principle.
There is, also, room for different opinions of the man
ner in which they were combined in the conceptions of
both their authors and their interpreters ; but the fact
of some kind of combination must be admitted. The
view of the Church Fathers generally, that all Messianic
prophecy is spoken directly of Christ, without reference
to any human medium or circumstances, not only fails
to represent the language of the writers, but misrepre
sents the Messiah, by ascribing to Him confession of
personal sin.* Another school of interpreters, repre
sented by Hengstenberg on the Continent, and by Alford
in England, makes the subject of most Messianic pro
phecies, especially those of the suffering Messiah,
to be an ideal rather than a real personage; Christ
collective, or Christ in the Church His body, and
not Christ personal. Any advantages which this
view may betimes appear to possess are more fully
realised on the typical principle, as generally main
tained ; while the language of such prophecies clearly
presents the present personal situation of the writer as
the basis of the prophetic prospect, and speaks of the
personal Christ, and not merely of Christ in the Church,
too decidedly and directly to admit of an ideal inter
pretation, which introduces vagueness and confusion
into the prophetic representation.
* Ps. xl. 12 ; Ps. lxix. 5.

124 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
9. The truths already elicited and applied in con
nection with types are alike applicable to the inter
pretation especially of typical prophecy. That the
prophets intended to prophecy and predicted events,
which the apostles interpreted as fulfilled in the new
economy, is undeniable. Otherwise, not only would
language have no meaning, and their writings no credi
bility, but prophecy, as a miracle of knowledge, must
be regarded as impossible. We need not discuss or
define how much could be known by natural suggestion
and rational foresight in the circumstances, and how
much was revealed. It is sufficient to know that the
prophecy was prior to the event, and that holy men of
old spake, being moved by the Holy Ghost, and not by
their own will.' They may not have known reflectively
the form of their own prophecies, whether direct or
typical ; but the spirit and style of their utterances
show that they generally spoke consciously of Christ,
which is the highest kind of Messianic prophecy.
We find, then, that New Testament quotation is
made throughout on the principle that prophecy must
be read as it is written. Its ideal or perfect pictures
of things are applied to successive events, which do not
realise their full significance. And, yet, this progres
sive fulfilment, which merely requires similar events,
occasions no difficulty of interpretation. It is always
interpreted as accomplished in events which, if there be
any recognised connection between words and things,
must be regarded as its complement.
It is also equally evident that its interpreters looked

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 125
to the divine as well as to the human idea or element,
and read the ancient prophecies inductively, and not
merely deductively, in the light of the facts of the
gospel, and not merely in their own light. And as
they knew that the old prophets ministered, not unto
themselves, but unto us, the grand facts and truths of
the gospel, they read and applied their prophecies in
the light of the times of their accomplishment.
10. Messianic prophecy is uniformly interpreted as
such, whatever view its interpreters may have enter
tained of its form or structure, whether direct or typi
cal. The correct interpretation of any prophecy does
not depend so much on its formal as upon its real
character, and the mode of its application. And when,
in any instance, its principle is admitted but its appli
cation denied, the question must be determined exe-
getically. The Messianic prophecies applied to the
grand facts and doctrines of the gospel must be ex
amined and vindicated individually.
It is of more importance to determine the concep
tion of the relation of type and antitype in the minds
of both their authors and their interpreters. Typical
prophecy was both written and rendered as having a
double reference, in the type to present, and in the
prophetic word to future realities, which were regarded
as two forms of the same underlying truth, and not as
disparate subjects, the one of which, as in allegory, is
a mere symbol of the other. New Testament inter
pretation deals with the words of such prophecy in

126 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION,
both its applications, and thereby maintains through
out the real unity of the revelation, instead of dealing,
as in the interpretation of allegory, first with words,
and next with things, as the symbols of truths.
11. This subject affords a fit opportunity of defin
ing the mutual relations of the divine purpose, the
divine prophetic word, and the divine promise, which
have occasioned considerable discussion among stu
dents of prophecy, and clear views of which are essen
tial to its correct interpretation.
The secret or subjective will of God is absolute or
unconditioned in all circumstances, at once under
lying and determining all the divine works and the
divine word in every form of prophecy. " Known
unto God are all His works from the beginning of the
world." " And His counsel shall stand, and He will
do all His pleasure." Prophecy, in reference to the
divine will, simply or subjectively, is absolute, and
must be fulfilled, being coincident with the divine
decree, the ground of which is unconditional. But
applied prophecy, viewed in its objective form as a
divine communication addressed to the human will,
presumed to be free and not forced, is certainly con
ditioned by human free agency, and contains, accord
ingly, the elements or aspects of promise and of com-
mination. As, indeed, all physical contingent events,
being mutually related or interdependent, are mutually
conditioned in regard to each other, yet absolute in
relation to the divine will in the law of causation ; so

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 127
prophecy, involving promise and threatening, is con
ditioned yet absolute, the conditioned absolute, God
thereby declaring and doing His will under certain
conditions of human choice or conduct, to which in
His moral government He has respect. Prophecy,
therefore, in this form is conditioned, not in anthro
pomorphic accommodation to the human faculties, but
in real accommodation to facts. This conception of
prophecy in this aspect, while it maintains the unity
of the divine will throughout, leaves the question of
the divine decree in its relation to human responsibi
lity unsolved, and perhaps insoluble.
12. This view may serve as a key to the solution
of parallel difficulties. God is said both to repent
and to be incapable of repentance. He repented that
He had made man and destroyed the old wicked
world. And He repented that He had made Saul
king, and deposed him from the throne. And yet we
are told that He is not a man that He should repent,
nor the son of man that He should change. Repent
ance has two forms, internal and external, the latter
being the effect and outward evidence of the former.
The divine will, as incapable of repentance, is abso
lute ; as mutable, it is conditioned by human conduct ;
according to which Saul was rejected from being king,
because he had rejected the Lord. But the divine
will was one throughout regarding both his appoint
ment and his deposition ; for Saul was given in His
anger, and taken away in His wrath. The change,

128 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
therefore, was apparent, and not real — a change of
procedure, and not of purpose, which throughout was
' one. The phraseology of such passages is anthropo
morphic only in the sense in which all language is
human, being the product of the human faculties and
forms of thought.
13. We place synthetic interpretation last in the
order of vindication, because it implies the other prin
ciples already discussed. The substance of several
passages is combined and interpreted either grammati
cally, analogically, or typically. It is founded on the
unity of the revelation, or of the dispensations, a truth
which cannot be denied without denying not only the
uniformity of the divine operations, but more especially
the unity of revealed religion in its several forms,
and thereby even the unity of the divine nature. We
would be also thrown back on one or other of the
following theories : — On simple Gnosticism, which attri
buted the Old Testament, as well as the creation of
the world, to the Demiurge, on the ground of their
alleged imperfection; or on Gnosticism in the form
of Marcionism, which rejected the Old Testament be
cause of the prominence of the attribute of justice
there ; or we must endorse the rationalistic prin
ciple, which practically disunites the economies by
explaining away the distinctively typical and sacri
ficial elements of the law; or, again, admitting the
element of sacrifice, we may on the same vicious
principle substantially dissolve their connection by

VINDICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 129
exaggerating the secular aspects of the old economy,
and by representing circumcision as the seal of a civil
instead of a religious covenant, and the primary insti
tution of the Passover as a merely memorial, and not
as at once a sacrificial and a typical ordinance. But
the Apostles manifestly treated revelation as one whole
throughout, to be interpreted as it is written. As,
therefore, we find synthesis in the Old Testament as
well as in the New, we must accept the principle,
unless it can be shown to be misapplied, as not only
just, but the key to the fulness of Scripture and the
solvent of many difficulties in biblical exegesis.

PART Y.
APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES.
Section First.
1. We have noticed the various ways in which the
quotations already adduced are applied by the writers
of the New Testament. They may be said generally
to be employed for doctrine, for argument, and even
for mere illustration in the few cases of formal accom
modation. Together, they present a special and splendid
illustration of the text, " All Scripture is theopneustic,
and profitable for doctrine and for reproof, for correc
tion and for instruction in righteousness; that the
man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
all good works."
Our object here is to apply these quotations to cer
tain departments of biblical criticism and of biblical
doctrine. We shall employ them to demonstrate both
the external and internal unity of the canon of revela
tion. And we shall proceed upon the method of
rising from facts to principles, and of reasoning from
the greater to the less, from the more distinct to the
more obscure, that the argument may be all the clearer
and more conclusive. As the books of the New Tes
tament are universally acknowledged to have existed

APPLICATION of principles. 131
by the end of the second or the beginning of the third
century, we shall advance the evidence afforded by
the quotations of the earliest Fathers for the credi
bility of the New Testament, and specially of the
four gospels. These writers possess in point of proxi
mity more than they want in point of formal and full
quotation, so that they are singularly valid and valu
able witnesses to the authenticity and authority not
only of the cited books of the New Testament, but
also of the Old. We shall restrict the argument to
the value of their attestation, without attempting to
produce the other branches of the evidence, external
and internal, which may be found duly estimated and
applied in various works on the subject.
We shall find that the argument from the Apostolic
Fathers is cumulative, being founded on the double
analogy contained in their at once quoting the New
Testament as they cite the Old, and in their quoting
the Old as it is cited in the New. And we shall
endeavour to adjust the argument so as historically to
meet the different assaults that have been made upon
the credibility of the gospel history, which, though fre
quently challenged by unbelievers without the Church,
was not denied by Christian critics till towards the
close of the last century.
2. These attacks may be designated as the histori
cal, the rationalistic, in the two forms of naturalism
and supernaturalism, and the mythical, represented
respectively by the following theories. The learned

132 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
Eichorn, of Gottingen, in the beginning of the present
century, endeavoured, in his " Introduction to the
New Testament," to establish the plausible proposition
that there is no evidence of the existence of our gos
pels before the end of the second century, when the
general judgment of the Church selected and acknow
ledged as credible four out of the many floating and
jarring narratives which laid claim to this character.
This theory admits the general credibility, but denies
the authenticity of the Fourfold Gospel, and thereby
breaks the connection between these two things, and
leaves the truth of the gospels defenceless and vulner
able both in the heel and in the head. This theory
is in all respects unhistorical. We have adequate
historical evidence that apostolic writings were not
only carefully preserved by tradition in the Church's
memory, but also jealously conserved in her archives
or depositories, so that spurious gospels or epistles
would not have gained general acceptance as authentic
and authoritative.
Moreover, though the Council of Hippo, in 393,
united by a decree the smaller divisions of the writings
of the New Testament in one collection, still there is
ample proof that the canon was completed and acknow
ledged long prior to this date ; while there are absolutely
no historical traces of such an act as this theory pre
sumes. Schleiermacher, who acknowledged a supernatural
element in Christianity, and combined in himself the
spirituality of the Mystics with the rationalism of

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 133
the Gnostics and the Scholastics, admitted, like Eichorn,
the general authenticity and truth of the gospels, but
represented them as a crude but candid story, out of
which reason, by a process of historical analysis, must
elaborate the real history. This theory breaks down
all the defences of the gospel history nearly as com
pletely as the following scheme of pure rationalism.
The pure rationalists of the school of Tubingen,
including such men as Baur and Zeller, Schwegler and
Kostlin, whose guiding principle is that pure reason
is at once the source and the test of truth, admitted
that the gospels contain a basis of truth, but denied
their authenticity and general credibility, especially in
regard to miracles, and ascribed their origin or com
position to the circumstances of the times, in which
they found at once their date and their design.
3. Every form of the rationalistic theory assumes
what is amply disproved by facts — the intellectual, if
not the moral incompetency of the writers of the gos
pels ; while the speculation of the school of Tubingen
is contrary to the general fact urged by Olshausen to
sustain their authenticity, " that we nowhere find in
any writer of any part of the ancient world any indi
cation that only a single one of the four gospels was in
use, or ever known to exist separately. All possessed
the entire collection of the four gospels."* This also
the celebrated Tertullian, in his reply to the heretic
Marcion, who rejected Luke on doctrinal grounds, main-
* Introduc. (Clark).

134 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
tained to be a fact so undeniable in his day that he
laid the weight of his whole argument upon it.*
It is hardly less evident that works, originated or
composed on this principle, could not have been so gene
rally accepted as apostolical without evidence, and that,
even though they had been so formed, we would still
expect to possess some historical traces of their origin.
The theory of a protevangelion, or primary gospel,
prepared by the Apostles as a common guide-book for
themselves in their ministry, and employed by some
critics to harmonise the formal similarity of the four
gospels with their frequent dissimilarity, as it denies
their individual authenticity, is open to the same
historical objections as the other theories. Such a
gospel, even though well authenticated, and necessary
either to the uses of the Apostles then or of the critics
now, would rather prove, what rationalism most abhors,
that the supernatural element common to the four
gospels is integral, and not adventitious.
The notorious Strauss, who was both the pupil and
latterly the master of Baur, absolutely denied the his
torical truth of the gospels in any sense, by maintain
ing the wholly negative and destructive theory that
they are merely a collection or concretion of oral
myths or legends, formed around a nucleus of truth,
which grew up like a fungus in the early Christian
Church, and of themselves account for the miraculous
element in them. But, as if conscious that he pro
pounded a literary romance rather than a reality, he
* Adv. Marc. c. 2 and 5.

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 135
has studiously left both the precise period and the
cause of their composition undetermined. This specu
lation, like the physiological theory of transmutation
of species in its connection with the more general
theory of development, is fitly designated mythical,
for it cannot point to a single historical specimen as
the organic remains of the process of transformation of
the fungous myth, by which it professes to account for
the gospels. The more recent rationalist writers on
the Christian evidences, such as Mr. Arnold* and the
author of " Supernatural Religion," occupy the same
stand-point, and differ merely in the length to which
they carry their principles. Their tactics consist
in not only minimising adverse evidence, but in
denying its validity. The latter writer rejects the
fragments of Muratori and Apollinaris, because they
conflict with his theory. Both alike maintain that
the earliest patristic citation is not from our gospels,
but from earlier writings. Arnold asserts that the
record of the life of Jesus Christ, when we first get it,
has passed through half-a-century or more of oral
tradition, and at least through more than one written
account. He gives one long passage from Clement to
show that the Fathers always cite the Old Testament
literally. But we have given many passages to prove
that they cite the New Testament, as both they and
the evangelists quote the Old, both loosely and liter
ally, and without naming in either case the authors,
so that we have thereby a double analogy, which links
* Arnold, Contemporary Review, 1875, Art. 1. and "Super. Religion.''

136 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
together in the bonds of the same evidence the
authenticity and authority of the Old and New Testa
ments. And even though it were otherwise, the
degree of accessibility of the primary texts or records
would of itself at once occasion and account for certain
differences of citation. Such assertions, unsupported
by any real evidence, are not only neutralised, but the
opposite is established by the double analogy of
quotation. 4. We have said that the Apostolic Fathers quote
the New Testament, as we have seen that they cite
the Old, both literally and loosely, naming at the same
time the writers or books cited, or the Scripture
generally. We have adduced frequent instances of
formal quotation of this kind. We have also found a
numerous array of allusions to both the gospels and
the epistles of such a character, and made in such
circumstances, as to amount to formal quotations.
Literal references, especially when taken in connection
with a general acknowledgment of Scripture, or, in
particular, of the books alluded to, the existence of
which may also be otherwise proved from contem
porary history, possess the evidential value of formal
citations. We have also shown that these Fathers
quote the New Testament exactly as the New cites
the Old. If, therefore, patristic citation from the Old
Testament be held to prove the existence of not only
the books cited, but of the volume as a whole, the
same analogical argument is applicable to the New

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 137
Testament. The evidence is the same in both cases,
which must stand or fall together. And therefore the
quotations of the early Fathers, made in the same way
as the New Testament cites the Old, prove the age
and authorship or the authenticity of the cited writings
of the New.
Moreover, as these Fathers quote expressly certain
books or authors of the New Testament, the presump
tion arises that allusions similar in form to formal
citations are also real quotations, and have the same
logical value. , And, further, as they also cite certain
epistles already named, which not only embody, but
allude to prior well-known and admitted facts as their
basis, we have here another presumption, apart from
other evidence, that such facts were not only orally
transmitted, but recorded ; that the Gospels are the
seed-plot of the epistles, the facts of which they are
the philosophy — the historical basis of their developed
doctrine. The Gospels, therefore, are to be regarded as
authentic on grounds of both positive and negative
criticism. 5. It is evident that the authorship and the credi
bility of any writing are closely, if not casually, con
nected. The testimony' of an author who wrote at
the time and in the midst of the events recorded is
presumably true. And if he also give sufficient evi
dence of his intellectual and moral competency, his
testimony is to be accepted as credible. The earliest

138 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
patristic quotation proves that the gospels were
written in the age to which they profess to belong,
and by authors who were not only, as eye-witnesses,
entirely conversant with the facts recorded, but whose
writings show their intellectual, and their sufferings for
the truth their moral competency as historians. They
themselves appeal to their personal knowledge and
sufferings for the gospel as an obvious evidence of
their competency and the credibility of their testi
mony, which formerly was wont to be attacked by
avowed unbelievers only. And even now it is the
mental ability of the writers, and the facts of their
testimony, that are arraigned, and not their moral
competency, nor the validity of argumentation from
competency to credibility. But our special argument
here from the facts of quotation is founded on the
testimony borne to the credibility of the gospels by
contemporary authors, who, as the disciples and asso
ciates of the Evangelists, must have known their com
petency, and the truth of their testimony in the
circumstances. They would not have cited as credible
what they did not credit, and they would not have
accepted as true, without the amplest evidence, state
ments on which the weightiest issues, temporal and
spiritual, depended. And more especially, as we have
found that the earliest Fathers expressly mention some
of the earlier Pauline epistles, such as those to the
Ephesians and Philippians, and the first to the Corin
thians, the authenticity of which is admitted bjr hostile
critics, we can occupy this new position and thence

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 139
review and command the whole battle-field. We have
in them direct evidence of the truth of the principal
facts of Christianity, and, therefore, of the credibility
of the gospel history. This ought to be made, espe
cially in the present state of the apologetic controversy,
the principal position, instead of being, as hitherto,
regarded as merely subordinate, and even as itself
needing support.
On such a combination of evidence, which cannot
be advanced in favour of any spurious work of anti
quity, the Four Gospels are to be regarded as histori
cally credible.
6. By a similar argument, containing an essential
point of difference, the truth of the Old Testament
may be also demonstrated. The New Testament con
tains clear quotations from at least twenty-five out of
the thirty-nine books of the Old, which is cited under
the divisions or designations of " Moses," or " the law
and the prophets," to which is sometimes added the
'" Psalms." These facts of themselves prove that not
only the several books cited, but also the whole canon
of the Old Testament, were accepted, not only by the
authors of the New, but by the people to whom the
revelation was given, who received them as credible on
evidence similar to that on which the credibility of the
New Testament rests.
The argument in this form, and at this stage, regards
the Apostles as mere historians, and Jesus Christ as a
merely human teacher, citing for certain purposes

140 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
existing and acknowledged writings. But when we
come to the question of authority, which does not
depend merely on the objective truth of the Scriptures,
but on God speaking in them, we must take our stand
on the higher ground of inspiration. We have seen
the evidence, as derived from quotation, on which their
credibility rests ; and we now advance a step by main
taining that their truth involves their inspiration, and
thereby their authority. As Jesus Christ promised to
guide His Apostles by the Holy Spirit into all truth,
and to bring to their remembrance all that He had
spoken, and as they themselves not only expressly
claimed infallible guidance, but best knew the kind of
influence under which they spoke and wrote, we must re
gard the New Testament as the inspired, and, therefore,
authoritative will of God through human free agency.
And, moreover, as Christ, the incarnate Word of
God, and His inspired Apostles, quote and apply the
Old Scriptures so frequently and so faithfully, we must
regard them not merely as inspired because credible,
but as authoritative, both because they are inspired
and because they are so pronounced by the Lord and
the inspired authors of the New Testament. From
the wide field, therefore, of biblical and patristic quota
tion we draw the inference that all Scripture is given
by inspiration of God, through holy men moved by the
Holy Ghost. We are not called on to discuss here the
nature and extent of inspiration, or the distinction
that may be made between revelation and inspiration.
It is evident that the early Fathers of the Church did

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 141
not attempt to define the character and degree of
inspiration which belong to the Scriptures. It is also
clear that the subjective influence under which they
claim to have been given involves a corresponding
objective character or property of the records, whereby
they are really the word of God throughout in true
objective expression or development. This is more
important to the biblical student than any line of
demarcation which may be drawn between revelation
and inspiration, which being intimately, if not insepar
ably connected, may be so defined as either to include or
to exclude one another, according as they are regarded
as differing in kind or merely in degree. But as these
terms are both applied to Scripture, and cannot be
shown to be synonymous, inspiration, in its full and
proper sense, is to be regarded as the subjective
influence or condition necessary to receive or to deliver
the truth communicated by revelation.
It may be further argued, both from the nature of
the case and from Scripture itself, that the language
as well as the matter of revelation is inspired. Both
are given alike and at once in inspiration. Paul
declares that he uttered spiritual things in spiritual
words, not in the words of man's wisdom, but in the
words of the Holy Ghost. And as inspiration is a
subjective state under divine influence, it must extend
to both the form and the substance of the revelation.
It appears, indeed, to be impossible to separate these
two elements in any communication, human or divine.
The one psychologically involves the other less or

142 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
more, especially in intense mental states, which spon
taneously embody themselves in corresponding words.
This view of inspiration, as dynamical, places the
plenary inspiration of all Scripture on a solid basis,
such as the mechanical theory, which represents the
writers as the passive instruments of the Spirit, cannot ¦
lay. Revelation is seen to be the word of God in the
fullest and most literal sense, and the verbal differ
ences in the several reports of our Lord's sayings in
the Gospels, as well as the free translations and even
departures from the Hebrew in several quotations, if
they cannot be regarded as the primary and very
words of God or of Christ on the occasion, are still the
very words of the inspiring Spirit. Any argument
against verbal inspiration from such sources argues
ignorance of the real nature and extent of the divine
influence, assumes as true the palpable absurdity that
language best suited to one age or occasion is best
adapted to all others, and also limits the free agency
of the Sovereign Spirit, who is a law unto Himself,
while His operations are diverse and yet one. We
conclude, therefore, that the volume of the book of
revelation is one, and throughout the word of God,
stamped without with the seal of Heaven.
Section Second.
New Testament quotation equally demonstrates
the internal unity of revelation. We find there two
covenants of life, generally designated as the covenant
of works and the covenant of grace. The former was

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 143
made with man unfallen, the latter was made by God
with His Son, and given to man fallen. The one
having been broken is abolished, the other being
fulfilled by Christ remaineth. As revelations of the
divine will they closely followed one another, and
thus the restoration to God followed the fall. The
covenant of grace was revealed successively to Adam
and to Abraham, to Moses and by Christ, under
different forms of development, which are to each
other as the germ, the blade, the ear, and the full
corn in the ear. The Sinaitic covenant was a preli
minary form of the dispensation of grace. Its peculiar
national character was the Theocracy, all its moral,
religious, and civil laws having been directly given by
God, and administered under Him by judges and
kings, priests and prophets. As a rudimentary and
theocratic dispensation, its component parts were all
combined in one formal covenant, which could not
have assumed any other form in the circumstances.
Each of these elements had its own specific and appro
priate use. They were respectively the rule of religious
belief, of moral obedience, and of social life. The
ceremonial institute formed the substance of the cove- •
nant of grace, the moral and civil laws were merely
codicils or corollaries appended, just as the law is
added to the gospel, good works to grace, under the
new dispensation, especially in the grand Epistle to the
Romans, which begins with the cardinal doctrines of
grace and ends with the cardinal duties of life.
These quotations, then, enable us to demonstrate

144 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
the substantial identity of the dispensations, and to
deduce important apologetical inferences. The two
forms of the covenant are united organically, like the
root, trunk, and branches of a tree, which is pervaded
from the root to the topmost branch by a common
system of tissues and fibres, sap-veins, and circulating
fluids. They are radically and vitally connected, like
the head and all the members of the body.
(1.) They are united providentially or historically.
The Theocracy ended with the captivity of Judah ; the
revelation was closed soon after her return from cap
tivity. Ezra was the last inspired scribe, and Mala-
chi the last prophet ; but the dispensation continued
till Christ, by whom it was fulfilled and abrogated.
The Jewish nation was the Lord's covenanted people ;
Jerusalem was the centre of His kingdom, the temple
the seat of His glory, and the Shechinah the symbol of
His presence as theocratic King.
We find a continuous chain of historical facts per
vading and connecting these economies. These facts
are of two kinds, ordinary and extraordinary. The
former are like the underlying and invisible rocks
which unite two countries divided by a chasm, or two
continents divided by a sea. The histories of both
dispensations show a fine network, a wondrous web of
ordinary providences, fitting into each other, and ful
filling one will. There is, indeed, no sacred historical
link across the chasm between them — no prophet
crying in the desert during the dark ages of Judaism,
and ostensibly preparing the way of the Lord ; but the

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 145
Apocrypha and the Targums, profane histories and
the writings of the Jewish Josephus, demonstrate
the continued identity of the Jewish nation amid
many catastrophes, the continuity of the course of
divine providence towards the Church, and the con
tinuous connection of the economies. Jesus Christ
was born of the Jewish nation, and of the royal
family, under the same dispensation of grace, and
amid the same continuous march of grand moral
events. And even during the darkest ages, when
there was scarcely a star in all the sky, ordinary
events were paving the way for a better dispensation,
a more excellent way, according to the voice of all
the prophets.
The extraordinary moral events which pervade the
Old and New Testaments are like a series of erupted
rocks, of upheaved mountain chains, which hide their
heads in heaven. Both economies were alike introduced,
pervaded, and sustained throughout by a grand course
of similar moral miracles. There is a complete moral
analogy between them, ending in the logical proof of
a perfect moral identity. No other religion has ever
furnished or appealed to such evidence of its origin
and authority. These grand events fall in and fit
into one another, forming part of a common divine
plan and common continuous providence. The Judaism
of the Old Testament historically ends in the evan
gelism of the New. Both the underlying and the
outstanding historic bonds of unity are palpable. A
series of events, thus developed and linked into each
K

146 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
other, proves that these dispensations are substan
tially, if not formally one.
(2.) They are also connected prophetically. There
are distinct kinds of Old Testament prophecy ful
filled in the New. There are typical persons and
typical places, typical institutions and typical events
of the old economy, realised in the gospel. All
these are silent prophecies, the significance of facts,
revealing the dawn that would chase the shadows
away. And, then, there is the grand array of word pro
phecies, shining like stars in the night until the day
dawned and the day-star arose.
We have also distinct classes of prophecies, already
enumerated, in the Old and New Testaments. Some
of these are as clearly fulfilled as others are manifestly
unfulfilled. Many of the former are fulfilled in the
latter; while some of both Testaments overleap the
events of the evangelical history, such as the planting
and propagation of Christianity, and terminate in long
posterior ' events. Some are single prophecies, having
but one reference, and fulfilled in single or solitary
events ; others have a double reference, a temporal
and a spiritual aspect, and both an early and a late
fulfilment. Some, accordingly, found a complete pre
sent accomplishment in the events of the time ; but
most prophecies have a progressive development or
fulfilment, embracing and being fulfilled in the similar
grand moral events of successive ages. But all clearly
fulfilled prophecy, of every kind and class, identifies

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 147
the economies, and binds them together by bonds that
cannot be broken. Every prophecy of the Old ful
filled in the New links them together by a chain of
adamant. And the prophecies common to both, clearly
accomplished in the later events of the world or the
Church, are a double-linked chain, uniting both econo
mies, and declaring them to be not disjointed and dis
cordant systems, but parts of a grand moral unity in
diversity — elements of the great redemptive plan of
love and wisdom — the woof and warp of the varie
gated web of providential grace, which God has been
weavmg since time began — winding labyrinths of
which we have the clue — mysterious plots of which
we know the plan.
(3.) They are identified morally and spiritually.
The same moral principles of truth, justice, and
benevolence prevail throughout the Scriptures. The
normal moral code of both Testaments is the same.
The Decalogue is the moral law for all men and for
all ages. It consists of two grand principles, supreme
love to God and sincere love to man, on which hang
all the law and the prophets and apostles, as all the
branches of a tree depend upon the trunk. The
ground or basis of obedience is the revealed character
of God, and especially His love as the Lord our God
and Redeemer, and the motive or ¦ mainspring in the
human soul is felt love. The righteousness of this
law the Son of God, as the Son of man, has not only
fulfilled but magnified and made honourable. And,
accordingly, obedience under the gospel is enjoined on

148 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
the same grounds and from the same motives — love to
God for the manifestation of His love in the character
and work of Christ. The new moral commandment
of the gospel is certainly not that we love God
supremely or one another with a pure heart fervently,
but that we love each other as Christ hath loved us.
It is a new yet an old commandment, old as Adam in
its principle, and as Moses in its formal basis, and
new merely in its formal motive, the gracious work of
Christ, which is a new thing in the earth, a new form
of the divine love.
We also find that all the spiritual feelings required
and actually exercised under the law and the gospel
are the same. The form of worship is different, but
the spirit is one. The former, accordingly, is changed,
but the latter abides unchanged and unchangeable.
The same faith and the same fear, the same hope and
the same joy, the same humility and the same holiness,
run like a perennial stream throughout both economies.
The principles of subjective religion are throughout
the same. A complete moral and spiritual identity
prevails. (4.) They are identified doctrinally. Their doctrinal
oneness is as conspicuous as the harmony of the solar
system, as the unity of the earth itself, or the un
broken unity of the arch of heaven. Not only is the
grand method of salvation doctrinally the same, there
is a complete and constant agreement in the minor
details of the development of doctrine, expressed in
different languages and in different forms of phrase-

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 149
ology. Christ and the authors of the New Testament
constantly quote and comment upon the facts and
doctrines of the Old Testament as inculcating the
same truths which they more fully developed and
declared. It is, indeed, their text-book and book of
reference on all occasions. They treat the doctrine of
the old prophets as the same as their own, both in its
source and in its substance. A grand series of writers
of different ages and countries, some of whom were
ignorant of each other's writings at the time they wrote
themselves, have concurred in revealing the same
truths in different forms to us, on whom the ends of
the world are come. The Scriptures, like Joseph's
coat, are of many colours ; and like Christ's, without
seam, woven from the top throughout.
(5.) They are related exegetically. The two Testa
ments are mutually interpreting. The New Testament
interprets the Old, which in turn illustrates the New.
Both are to be expounded on substantially the same
•principles. They are like a double lock with double
keys, either of which opens both compartments.
Necessary to one another and unintelligible singly, the
one unlocks the other. We read the Old in the
clearer light of the New, and the New in the light of
the language and literature of the Old. The philo
logical and exegetical uses of the Old Testament are
invaluable. As the human race was furnished through
the sensible signs and sacrifices of the law with the
high ideas of sin, satisfaction, and salvation, realised in
the gospel, we must now read the dispensations in

150 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
each other's light. The Epistle to the Hebrews in
particular is a key to the symbolism of the law, which
is a rude outline of the gospel, but the life of Jesus
Christ, the end of all the law, is the light in which
we read those mystical sacrifices which threw their
shadows before them, and now shed down their light
upon the cross. The law and the gospel are not
merely the lesser and greater lights that rule night
and day, but binary stars- that commingle and combine
to dispel the darkness of the moral world.
(6.) The Old and New Scriptures, as thus internally
connected, are consequently related apologetically.
We have not only the evidence of external and
internal testimony in favour of their credibility and
authority, but the evidence of their internal harmony
in proof of their divine origin, authority, and perpetual
obligation. The same things are demonstrated in
different ways and from different stand-points. In
estimating the value of the internal argument, it is of
importance to notice that a revelation and a dispen
sation, though mutually related, and probably contem
poraneous and coincident, are certainly not identical.
The revelation is not the dispensation, but its law.
The dispensations, both old and new, commenced, and
were carried on for a time, without written revelations
or records. There was, indeed, an oral, but there was
no written revelation. The economies were established
less or more, especially the patriarchal and evangelical,
and then their laws were recorded. Oral revelation,
or a divine communication from God to man, is the

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 151
instrumental cause of any form of the kingdom of God,
and a written revelation its law. In one or other
form, revelation mediately creates and directly regu
lates the dispensation.
Hence the form of a dispensation may be changed,
and yet the revelation remain ; the one may not only
be fulfilled while the other is not annulled, but the
abolition of the one may become the confirmation of
the other. Besides, a dispensation may change its
form and yet retain its substance. The Old and New
Testaments contain merely two forms of the same
covenant of grace. Consequently, changes which
affected the form of the dispensation would not affect
the substance of the revelation. Hence the New
Testament is not an absolutely new revelation, but
another and higher form of the old revelation. Modern
errors, Continental and British, regarding the character,
authority, and permanence of the Old Testament, and
specially of the Decalogue, arise mainly from miscon
ception on this subject. They confound the revelation
with the dispensation, and then reason analogically,
that the abrogation of the latter involved the abolition
of the former. They ignore the fact that the law
embodies and exhibits the same spiritual and immut
able principles of .morality and religion as the gospel.
A new and clearer exhibition of old truths is also
confounded with truths absolutely new. It is also
forgotten that, in connection with the permanence of
the revelation, the question, or the contrast, is not
between the moral and the ceremonial element of the

152 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
revelation, but between the permanence of the reve
lation and the change of the dispensation.
These preliminary observations are illustrated by
the following apologetic inferences from the internal
unity of the revelation already demonstrated : —
[1 .] The analogy of the facts of history or providence
proves that the God of nature is the God of provi
dence, the God of history the God of revelation, and
particularly, that the Author of the Old Testament is
the Author of the New. Gnosticism, the first and
most formidable speculative heresy of the early Church,
ascribed creation and the Old Testament to the same
evil author, the world-god, and the New to the God
and Father of Jesus Christ, sent to deliver mankind
from the bondage of corrupt " matter. Marcion, who
was a Gnostic, not only rejected the Old Testament,
but all the gospels except Luke's, which he also purged
of its supposed Judaism. Our modern Marcionism,
though less negative, is not much more rational. We
find the same carnal views of the Old Testament, and,
consequently of its Author, formed also from similar
stand -points.
[2.] The identity of the moral and spiritual prin
ciples of Scripture evinces a common origin in the
divine nature, of which His will is the index, and His
word the law. It proves them to be alike divine
and immutable. Their formal expression may change,
but their substance is permanent — the underlying
principle of the form is free from all change. Thus,
the peculiar Judaical form of the preface to the ten

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 153
commandments, and the form of the promise annexed
to the fifth commandment, contain two spiritual and
immutable principles.
It also follows, from what has been already said,
that there may be a progressive development of reve
lation without an increment of essentially new truth.
As the oak lies in the acorn, so the New Testament
lies in the Old. The new phase of truth, as a develop
ment or fuller revelation, is merely relatively new — a
new phenomenon, and not a new truth. Neither the
morality nor the religion of the Old Testament are so
clear and full as those of the New, but they are the
same morality and religion. The inner and outer
religious life of saints under both economies are the
same in kind, though they are or ought to be different
in degree.* The new facts of the gospel history have
not altered, but merely enlarged the basis of both
doctrinal and moral theology. Thus, the incarnation of
the Son of God, the grandest fact of history, together
with all the singular events of His life, death, and
resurrection, is a new and unexampled phenomenon,
the basis not of other truths, but of higher truths of
faith and moral duty than were revealed and incul
cated in the law. But even these new facts and higher
truths were preintimated or prefigured since creation
and the covenant, so that they appear as fuller and
clearer revelations of similar grand facts and principles
of belief and duty. The revelation preceded and pro
claimed the facts and doctrines, and the philosophy
* Heb. xi 13-40.

154 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
follows the facts. And, therefore, although the facts
as facts, or events of time and space, be new, neither
the facts nor the truths are new in reference to the
revelation, which contained much that was misunder
stood by the people to whom it came. The law was
the nursery of the gospel, as the gospels are the nur
sery of the full gospel of the epistles. Jesus Christ
carried the law forward to its ultimate development,
and became its end both for revelation and for right
eousness. At once the goal and the glory of the law, He
supplied new motives to belief and obedience — rather
than an entirely new, much less another basis of faith.
In like manner, in the moral region we have in the
gospel merely a fuller and clearer enunciation of the
morality ; not of the law of natural conscience, but of
the revealed law of the Decalogue. As revealed reli
gion is higher than natural religion, so revealed mora
lity is higher than natural morality. The foundation
of all moral obligation is the moral relations of the
Creator and the creature. Natural moral duty rests
on the facts of creation and providential care only;
but revealed morality embraces all the divine and
human correlations of creation and the cross, which
are fixed and immutable. The Decalogue, as some
thing more than natural morality, is the divine and
unchangeable expression in Ten Words of the whole of
our moral relations, adapted in its form to the circum
stances in which it was given. Hence we may have
better morals and higher developments of moral law
in the gospel, but we cannot have other or higher

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 155
morality in kind. We have in the New Testament
ampler and clearer announcements and applications in
morality as in religion. We have morality in a life
which is more vivid and striking than in a cold code.
The life of Jesus Christ is more expressive, and, there
fore, more impressive, than the Decalogue. It is a
living law, which gives not only the precept, but the
special instances or illustrations. The gospel history,
the Sermon on the Mount, the doctrinal epistles, and
especially the twelfth chapter of the Epistle to the
Romans, are commentaries on the law and confirma
tions of its truth and perpetuity. The evangelical
commandment, "And ye ought also to lay down your
lives for the brethren," cannot be higher in principle
than the moral teaching of the law in obedience to
which the Jewish saints laid down their lives for
Christ and the Church.* The morality of the gospel
cannot be higher in kind than that of the law, when
one grand end of the former is to restore humanity by
redemption and regeneration to the obedience of the
grand principles on which hang all the law and the
prophets — supreme love to God, and sincere love to
man, known by Jewish believers, and beyond which we
cannot further go. The new commandment which Jesus
gave His disciples is new only in its motive, His own
example, that we love one another as He hath loved us.
Hence we conclude that neither the Decalogue nor
the ancient Scriptures, of which it formed a part,
have passed away. All passages which might be so
* 1 John iii. 16 ; Heb. xi.

156 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
construed are capable of clear definition and defence.
The Lord's Sermon on the Mount has a double design,
at once to correct the carnal notions of Paganism and
Judaism, and to reveal the perfection of the primary
and integral principles of the law. He does not
enunciate a single truth, the root of which is not to be
found in the Old Testament. He corrects the carnal
maxims of Paganism, and the corrupt glosses of the
Scribes, but not the primary and normal legislation of
the law. The contrast is not between His own teaching
and the doctrine of the law, but between His teaching
.and their teaching. Between the obscure legislation
of the law and His own clearer legislation, there is a
comparison, but no radical contrast. The Judaical
form of the Decalogue contains and covers eternal
principles, which merely need to be translated into
modern phraseology. Our Lord's much-disputed utter
ance regarding the law and the prophets, refers to the
revelation rather than to the dispensation of which it
was the law.* He emphatically declares that the Old
Testament will not lose one jot or tittle of its truth
and authority till the consummation of all things.
The Scriptures will not pass away till they be perfectly
fulfilled in Christ, and in the age which He inaugurated.
They were not wholly fulfilled in Christ Himself,
when the moral law was magnified and the ceremonial
accomplished ; for the prophecies are being fulfilled in
the history of the Christian Church from its com
mencement to its consummation. And, therefore,
•Matt v. 17, 18.

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPLES. 157
although the ancient dispensation is fulfilled, and
thereby annulled in Christ, still the revelation remains
as binding as ever in respect to religious belief and
moral duty.
[3.] The assertion, lately made with all the assurance
of a positive discovery, that the Decalogue has formally
passed away, is based upon the distinction made
between the moral law and the Decalogue. Both are
admitted to be moral, but the former is called natural
moral, the latter moral positive or moral ceremonial.
But the Decalogue, given to fallen man as a rule of
life, is at once natural, ¦ moral, and positive. It is
natural, as founded on the law of our nature, moral, as
expressing our moral relations and obligations, and
positive, as enjoined on us as the law of our life. It
is well, also, to consider the goal to which this baseless
and reckless speculation conducts. The dogma of a
transient Decalogue in any form, except as a formal
and binding constituent of the old Sinaitic Covenant,
logically tends to sap the foundation of all moral and
religious obligation. If the revealed moral law has
passed away, then morality is ceremonial or positive,
founded on the mere arbitrary will of God, and not
upon the -moral relations of Creator and creature, and
consequently has become obsolete. — conscience and
religion are mere names — God and man are non-
moral beings, and though man be conscious of his own
existence, yet the moral personality of God, if not
the existence of an Almighty Intelligence, or of an
impersonal Power, cannot be demonstrated.

158 PRINCIPLES OF NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.
[4.] We conclude by urging the argument furnished
by all clearly fulfilled prophecy in favour of the in
spiration and authority of revelation. Accomplished
prophecy of every kind and form demonstrates the
unity of the Scriptures, and thereby the authority not
only of the particular author of any prediction, but of
the whole canon. If writers, born in different ages
and countries, and often unknown to each other, could
tell without collusion so concordant a tale, weave so
unique and beautiful a web of truth, and utter so
many clear and concurrent prophecies, the Scripture
must be true from the beginning, from Moses to
Malachi, and from Jesus to John, and holy men have
spoken, being moved by the Holy Ghost.
We have presented throughout a few aspects of the
unity of the Divine Word, the full glory of which is
incomprehensible. When we look upon a grand
landscape from a low level, through the mists of its
mountains and the vapours of its sky, we cannot
discern the unity in diversity of its heights and
hollows, and the unique beauty of the scene. Now we
know but in part, and prophecy in part, but when
that which is perfect is come, that which is in part
shall be done away. We shall be able to read from
the high stand-point of heaven all the revelations of
wisdom and love in each other's light, in the light of
our own experience, and in the light of that glory, to
which they lighted and led the way.
FINIS.

INDEX OP
NEW TESTAMENT QUOTATION.

New Testament.

Old Testament.

Matthew i 23, 

Isa. vii. 14.

11

ii. 6, 

Mic. v. 1, 2.

11

ii. 15, 

Hos. xi. 1.

11

ii. 18, 

Jer. xxxi 15.

n

ii. 23, 

Isa. xi. 1.

ti

ti

Isa. liii. 3.

n

iii. 3, ... • 

Isa. xl. 3.

n

iv. 4,

Deut. viii. 3.

n

iv. 6, 

Ps. xci. 11, 12

n

ti

Ps. xc.

m

iv.7, 

Deut. vi. 16.

n

iv. 10, 

Deut. vi. 13.

ii

iv. 15, 16, 

Isa. viii. 23.

n

n

Isa. ix. 1, 2.

ii

viii. 17, 

Isa. liii. 4.

n

ix. 13, 

Hos. vi. 6.

n

xi. 10, 

Mai. iii. 1.

ii

xii. 7, 

Hos. vi. 6.

n

xii. 18-21, 

Isa. xiii. 1-4.

n

xiii. 14, 15,

Isa. vi. 9, 10.

n

xiii 35, 

Ps. lxxviii. 2.

ii

¦i

Ps. Ixxvii.

u

xv. 4 fp, 

Exod. xx. 12.

u

xv. 4 fp,

Deut. v. 16.

n

xv. 4 lp,

Exod. xxi. 17.

ii

xv. 8, 9, 

Isa. xxix. 13.

it

xviii. 16,

Deut. xix. 15.

n

xix. 4, 

Gen. i. 27.

160

INDEX.

New Testament.
Matthew xix. 5, ...
n xix. 18,
n ii
ii xix. 19 fp,
ii n
it xix. 19 lp,
ii xxi. 5,
ii xxi 13 fp,
ii xxi. 13 lp,
n xxi. 16,
ii xxi. 42,
ii ti
ii xxii. 24,
n xxii. 32,
ii xxii. 37,
ii xxii. 39,
ii xxii. 44,
n n
,i xxvi. 31,
n xxvii. 9, 10,
m xxvii. 35,
ii ii
u xxvii. 46,

Old Testament.
Gen. ii. 24.
Exod. xx. 13-16.
Deut. v. 17-20.
Exod. xx. 12.
Deut. v. 16.
Lev. xix. 18.
Zech. ix. 9.
Isa. lvi. 7.
Jer. vii. 11.
Ps. viii. 3.
Ps. cxviii. 22, 23.
Ps. cxvii
Deut. xxv. 5.
Exod. iii. 6.
Deut. vi. 5.
Lev. xix. 18.
Ps. ex. 1.
Ps. cix.
Zech. xiii. 7.
Zech. xi. 13.
Ps. xxii. 19.
Ps. xxi.
Ps. xxii. 2.
Ps. xxi.

MAEKi. 2,
„ i. 3,
„ iv. 12,
„ vii. 6, 7,
„ vii. 10 fp, ...
n vii. 10 lp, ...
ii x. 6,
„ x. 7, 8,
u x. 19 fp,
ii n
„ x. 19 lp, ...
„ x. 19 lp,
„ xi 17 fp, ...
„ xi. 17 lp, ...
ii xii. 10, 11, ...

Mai. iii. 1.
Isa. xl. 3.
Isa. vi. 9, 10.
Isa. xxix. 13.
Exod. xx. 12.
Exod. xxi. 17.
Gen. i 27.
Gen. ii. 24.
Exod. xx. 13-17.
Deut. v. 17-21.
Exod. xx. 12.
Deut. v. 16.
Isa. lvi. 7.
Jer. vii. 11.
Ps. cxviii. 22, 23.
Ps. cxvii.

INDEX.

161

New Testament.
Mark xii. 19,
n xii. 26,
,i xii. 29, 30,
ii xii. 31,
ii xii. 36,
ii m
ii xiv. 27,
„ xv. 28,
ii xv. 34,

Old Testament.
Deut. xxv. 5.
Exod. iii. 6.
Deut. vi. 4, 5.
Lev. xix. 18.
Ps. ex. 1.
Ps. cix.
Zech. xiii. 7.
Isa. liii. 12.
Ps. xxii. 2.
Ps. xxi.

Luke i 17,
n n
„ ii. 23,
„ ii 24,
ii iii, 4-6,
ii iv. 4,
„ iv. 8,
„ iv. 10, 11,
ti n
,i iv. 12,
„ iv. 18, 19,
ii vii. 27,
ii viii. 10,
„ x. 27 fp,
,i x. 27 lp,
n xviii. 20 fp,
ii ii
n xviii. 20 lp,
it ii
ii xix. 46 fp,
ii xix. 46 lp,
II xx. 17,
ti it
ii xx. 28,
„ xx. 42, 43,
ii xx. 42, 43,
ii xxii. 37,
ii xxiii. 46,

Mai. iii. 23, 24.
Mai. iv. 4, 5.
Exod. xiii. 2.
Lev. xii. 8.
Isa. xl. 3-5.
Deut. viii. 3.
Deut. vi. 13.
Ps. xci 11, 12.
Ps. xc.
Deut. vi. 16.
Isa. lxi. 1, 2.
Mai. iii. 1.
Isa. vi. ix.
Deut. vi 5.
Lev. xix. 18.
Exod. xx. 13-16.
Deut. v. 17-20.
Exod. xx. 12!
Deut. v. 16.
Isa. lvi. 7.
Jer. vii 11.
Ps. cxviii. 22.
Ps. cxvii.
Deut. xxv. 5.
Ps. ex. 1.
Ps. cix.
Isa. liii. 12.
Ps. xxxi. 6.
Ps. xxx. L

162

INDEX.

New Testament.
John i. 23,
ii. 17,
ii
vi. 81,
n
vi. 45,
vii. 38,

vii. 42,

viii. 17,

x. 34,

ii
xii. 14,

15,

xii. 38,

xii. 40,

xiii. 18
xv. 25,
xix. 24,
rix. 37,
Old Testament.
Isa. xl. 3.
Ps. Ixix. 10.
Ps. lxviii.
Ps. lxxviii. 24.
Ps. Ixxvii.
Isa. liv. 13.
Isa. xliv. 3.
Isa, 1. 1.
Isa. Iviii. 11.
2 Sam. vii. 11-16.
1 Kings viii. 25.
Isa. xi. 1.
Jer. xxiii. 5.
Mic. v. 2.
1 Sam. xvi. 1-13.
Deut. xix. 15.
Ps. lxxxii. 6.
Ps. lxxi.
Zech. ix. 9.
Isa. liii. 1.
Isa. vi. 10.
Ps. xii. 9.
Ps. xl.
Ps. xxxv. 19.
Ps. xxxiv.
Ps. xxxviii. 20.
Ps. Ixix. 5.
Ps. cix. 3.
Ps. xxii. 19.
Ps. xxi.
Exod. xii. 46.
Ps. xxxiv. 21.
Ps. xxxiii.
Zech. xii. 10.
Acts i. 20 fp,
ii i 20 fp,
,i i 20 lp,
M II
„ ii. 17-21,
Ps. Ixix. 26.
Ps. lxviii.
Ps. cix. 8.
Ps. cviii.
Joel iii. 1-5.
Joel ii. 28-32.
INDEX.

163

New Testament.
Acts ii. 25-28,

ii. 34, 35,
II
iii. 22, 23,
iii. 25,
iv. 11,
II
iv. 25, 26,
vii. 3,
vii. 6, 7,
vii. 26, 28,
vii. 32,
vii. 33, 34,
vii. 35,
vii. 37,
vii. 40,
vii. 42, 43,
vii. 49, 50,
viii. 32, 33,
xiii. 22,

xiii 33,
xiii. 34,
xiii. 35,
xiii. 41,
xiii. 47,
xv. 16, 17, ...
xxiii. 5,
m
xxviii. 26, 27,

Romans i. 17,
ii. 24,
iii. 4 fp,
ti
iii. 4 lp,
M
iii. 10,

Old Testament.
Ps. xvi. 8-11.
Ps. XV.
Ps. ex. 1.
Ps. cix.
Deut. xviii. 15-19.
Gen. xxii. 18.
Ps. cxviii. 22.
Ps. cxvii.
Ps. ii. 1, 2.
Gen. xii. 1.
Gen. xv. 13, 14.
Exod. iii. 13, 14.
Exod. iii. 6.
Exod. iii. 5-10.
Exod. ii. 14.
Deut. xviii. 15.
Exod. xxxii. 1, 23.
Amos v. 25-27.
Isa. ixvi. 1, 2.
Isa. liii. 7, 8.
1 Sam. xiii. 14.
Ps. lxxxix. 21.
Ps. lxxxviii,
Ps. ii. 7.
Isa. Iv. 3.
Ps. xvi. 10.
Ps. cxv.
Hab. i. 5.
Isa. xlix. 6.
Amos ix. 11, 12.
Exod. xxii. 27.
Exod. xxii. 28.
Isa. vi. 9, 10.
Hab. ii. 4.
Isa. Iii. 5.
Ps. cxvi. 11.
Ps. cxv.
Ps. Ii. 6.
Ps. 1.
Eccles. vii. 20.

164

INDEX.

New Testament.
Romans iii. 11, 12,

iii. 13 fp,
iii. 13 lp,

iii. 14,

iii.

15, 17,

iii.

18,

1

iv.

3,

iv.

7,8,

iv.

17,

iv.

18,

vii

• 7,

viii; 36,
ii
ix. 7,
ix. 9,
ix. 12,
ix. 13,
ix. 15,
ix. 17,
ix. 25,
II
ix. 26,

ix

27, 28

ix

29,

ix

33,

x.

II 5,

X.

6-8,

X.

11,

X.

13,

X.

11 15,

X.

16,

X.

18,

Old Testament.
Ps. xiv. 2, 3.
Ps. xiii.
Ps. v. 10.
Ps. cxl. 4.
Ps. cxxxix.
Ps. x. 7.
Ps. ix. 28.
Isa. lix. ,7, 8.
Ps. xxxvi. 2.
Ps. xxxv.
Gen. xv. 6.
Ps. xxxii. 1, 2.
Ps. xxxi.
Gen. xvii. 5.
Gen. xv. 5.
Exod. xx. 17.
Deut. v. 21.
Ps. xliv. 23.
Ps. xliii.
Gen. xxi. 12.
Gen. xviii. 10.
Gen. xxv. 23.
Mai. i. 2. 3.
Exod. xxxiii. 19.
Exod. ix. 16.
Hos. ii. 25.
Hos. ii. 23.
Hos. ii. 1.
Hos. i 10.
Isa. x. 22, 23.
Isa. i. 9.
Isa. viii. 14.
Isa. xxviii. 16.
Lev. xviii. 5.
Deut. xxx. 12-14.
Isa. xxviii. 16.
Joel iii. 5.
Joel ii. 32.
Isa. Iii. 7.
Isa. liii. 1.
Ps. xix. 5.

INDEX.

165

New Testament.
Romans x. 18,
x. 19,
x 20, 21, ...
xi. 3,
xi. 4,
xi. 8,
II
xi. 9, 10, ...
n
xi. 26, 27,
xi. 27, ...
xi. 34,
xii. 19, ...
xii 20, ...
xiii. 9 fp, ...
ii
xiii. 9 lp, ...
xiv. 11, ...
xv. 3,
n
xv. 9,
It
xv. 10,
XV. 11, ...
fl ...
xv. 12, ...
xv. 21,
1 COBTNTHIANS i. 19,
i. 31,

ii. 9,
n
ii. 16,
iii. 19,
iii. 20,
iii. 20,
vi. 16,
ix. 9,
x. 7,
x. 20,

Old Testament.
Ps. xviii.
Deut. xxxii. 21.
Isa. lxv. 1, 2.
1 Kings xix. 14.
1 Kings xix. 18.
Deut. xxix. 3.
Isa. xxix. 10.
Ps. Ixix. 23, 24.
Ps. lxviii.
Isa. lix. 20, 21.
Isa. xxvii. 9.
Isa. xl. 13.
Deut. xxxii. 35.
Prov. xxv. 21, 22.
Exod. xx. 13, 17.
Deut. v. 17-21.
Lev. xix. 18.
Isa. xiv. 23.
Ps. Ixix. 10.
Ps. lxviii.
Ps. xviii. 50.
Ps. xvii.
Deut. xxxii. 43.
Ps. cxvii. 1.
Ps. cxvi.
Isa. xi. 10.
Isa. Iii. 15.
Isa. xxix. 14.
Jer. ix. 23.
Jer. ix. 24.
Isa. lxiv. 3.
Isa. lxiv. 4.
Isa. xl. 13.
Job v. 13.
Ps. xciv. 11.
Ps. xciii.
Gen. ii. 24.
Deut. xxv. 4.
Exod. xxxii. 6.
Deut. xxxii. 17.

166

INDEX.

New Testament.

Old Testament.

1 COEINTHIANS X. 26,

Ps. xxiv. 1.

ii x. 28,

Ps. xxxiii.

ii xiv. 21,

Isa. xxviii. 11, 12

ii xv. 25,

 Ps. ex. 1.

ii it

 Ps. cix.

ii xv. 27,

 Ps. viii. 7.

ii xv. 32,

Isa. xxii. 13.

n xv. 45,

 Gen. ii. 7.

ii xv. 54,

Isa. xxv. 8.

ii xv. 55,

Hos. xiii. 4.

2 COEINTHIANS iv. 13,

Ps. cxvi. 10.

it it

Ps. cxv. 1.

ii vi. 2,

Isa. xlix. 8.

,i vi. 16,

Lev. xxvi. 11, 12.

It M

Ezek. xxxvii. 27.

,i vi. 17,

 Isa. Iii. 11, 12.

ii vi. 18,

 2 Sam. vii. 8-14.

ii viii. 15,

 Exod. xvi. 18.

ix. 7.

Prov. xxii. 9.

II II

Prov. xxii. 8.

ii ix. 9,

Ps. cxii 9.

n ti

Ps. cxi

n xiii. 1,

Deut. xix. 15.

Galatians iii. 6,

 Gen. xv. 6.

11 iii. 8,

Gen. xii. 3.

ii ii

Gen. xviii. 18.

ii iii. 10,

Deut. xxvii. 26.

ii iii. 11,

 Hab. ii. 4.

iii. 12,

Lev. xviii. 5.

„ iii. 13,

 Deut. xxi. 23.

,i iii. 16,

 Gen. xxii. 18.

„ iv. 27,

Isa. liv. 1.

„ iv. 30,

Gen. xxi. 10.

v. 14,

Lev. xix. 18.

EPHESIANS iv. 8,

 Ps. lxviii. 19.

ii it

Ps. lxvii

n v. 14,

Isa. Ix. 1, 19, 20.

ii v. 31,

 Gen. ii. 24.

INDEX.

167

New Testament.
EPHESIANS vi. 2, 3,

Old Testament.
Exod. xx. 12.
Deut. v. 16.

1 Timothy v. 18 fp,
n v. 18 lp,

2 Timothy ii. 19,

Hebeews i. 5 fp, ...

ii i 5 lp, ...

„ i 6,

II 11

h i. 7,

ii n
it i. 8, 9, ...

II II
i 10, 12,

II M ...
i. 13, ...

II I'
„ ii. 6-8, ...

ii. 12, ...

ti n

ti ii. 18 fp,

ii ii 13 lp,

„ iii 7-11,

it ii
ii iii. 15, ..

ii ti

„ iv. 3,

tl II
n iv. 4,

„ iv. 7, ..

II 1'

„ v. 5, ..

,i v. 6,

n v. 6,

vi. 14, ..

vii. 17, 21

II M

Deut. xxv. 4.
Lev. xix. 13.
Deut. xxv. 14, 15.
Numb. xvi. 5.
Ps. ii. 7.
2 Sam. vii. 14.
Ps. xcvii. 7.
Ps. xcvi
Ps. civ. 4.
Ps. ciii.
Ps. xiv. 7, 8.
Ps. xliv.
Ps. cii 26-28.
Ps. ci
Ps. ex. 1.
Ps. cix.
Ps. viii. 5-7.
Ps. xxii. 23.
Ps. xxi.
Isa. viii. 17.
Isa. viii. 18.
Ps. xcv. 7-11.
Ps. xciv. 8-11.
Ps. xcv. 7, 8.
Ps. xciv. 8.
Ps. xcv. 11.
Ps. xciv.
Gen. ii. 2.
Ps. xcv. 7, 8.
Ps. xciv. 8.
Ps. ii. 7.
Ps. ex. 4.
Ps. cix.
Gen. xxii. 17.
Ps. ex. 4.
Ps. cix.

168

INDEX.

New Testament.
Hebeews viii 5,
viii 8-12,

ix. 20,
x. 5-7,

x. 16, 17
n
x. 30,

x. 37, 38.
xi. 18,
xi. 21,
xii. 5, 6,
xii. 20,
xii. 21,
xii. 26,
xiii. 5,
ii
xiii. 6,

James ii. 8,
ii. 11,

ii. 23,
iv. 5,

iv. 6,
v. 20,

1 PETEEi. 16,
i. 24, 25,

ii. 7, ti
ii. 9,
ii. 22,

Old Testament.
Exod. 25, 40.
Jer. xxxi. 31-34.
Jer. xxxviii. 31-34.
Exod. xxiv. 8.
Ps. xl. 7-9.
PS. XYY1Y.
Jer. xxxi. 33, 34.
Jer. xxxviii.
Deut. xxxii. 35, 36.
Ps. cxxxv. 14.
Ps. cxxxiv.
Hab. ii. 3, 4.
Gen. xxi. 12.
Gen. xlvii 31.
Prov. iii. 11, 12.
Exod. xix. 12, 13.
Deut. ix. 19.
Hag. ii 6.
Deut. xxxi. 6, 8.
Josh. i. 5.
Ps. cxviii. 6.
Ps. cxvii.
Lev. xix. 18.
Exod. xx. 13, 14.
Exod. xx. 13, 15.
Deut. v. 17, 18.
Gen. xv. 6.
Prov. xxi. 10.'
Ezek. xxiii. 25.
Numb, xi 29.
Prov. iii. 34.
Prov. x. 12.
Lev. xi. 44.
Isa. xl. 6-8.
Isa. xxviii. 16.
Ps. cxviii. 22.
Ps. cxvii.
Exod. xix. 6.
Isa. liii. 9.

INDEX.

169

New Testament.

1 Peter ii.

24 fp,

it ii.

24 lp,

it iii

10-12,

it iii

11 14, 15,

11 iv

8,

2 Petek ii. 22 fp,
Revelation ii. 27,

Old Testament.
Isa. liii. 4, 11, 12.
Isa. liii. 5.
Ps. xxxiv. 13-17.
Ps. xxxiii.
Isa. viii. 12, 13.
Prov. x. 12.
Prov. xxvi. 11.
Ps. ii. 9.

LOKIMER AKD GILLIES, PRINTERS, CLYDE STREET, EDINBURGH.

WORKS
PDBLISHED BY
T. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.

In crown 8vo, price is.,
AIDS TO THE STUDY
OE
GERMAN THEOLOGY.
By Bev. GEORGE MATHESON, M.A., B.D.,
MINISTER OF INNELLAN.
I. Natural Theology of Kant. 2. Kant's Interpretation of the Facts of
Scripture. 3. Transition of Schleiermacher. 4. Thought-Transla
tion of the System of Schleiermacher. 5. Diversities in his School.
6. Eichte. 7. Introduction to the Theology of Hegel and Schelling.
8. Trinity of Hegel and Schelling. 9. Evolution of Hegelian
Trinity in Time. 10. And in the History of the Church. 11. The
Right and Left. 12. Mythical Theory of Strauss. 13. Breaking
up of the Mythical Theory — School of Tubingen. 14. Signs of a
Return to the Old Rationalism. 15. " The Old Faith and the New."
16. Parallel between the History of English and German Theology.
" The writer of this treatise has formed to himself singularly clear conceptions,
and he possesses in a remarkable degree the faculty of lucid exposition. . . .
Besides serving as an admirable introduction to the study of German theology, this
little volume will be valuable to the general reader, as furnishing an intelligible
and interesting account of the principal phases which theological speculation has
assumed in Germany in modern times." — Scotsman.
" This little volume is a valuable and instructive introduction to a department of
theological literature that every student is now compelled to examine." — British
Quarterly Review. Just published, in demy 8*o, price 10s. Sd.,
DELIVERY AND DEVELOPMENT
OF
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE.
%\t cfiftlj SS-erits oi % CuntrmgjjHtn: |Lettans.
By BOBEBT BAINY, D.D.,
PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY AND CHURCH HISTORY, NEW COLLEGE, EDINBURGH.
" "We gladly acknowledge their high excellence and the extensive learning which
they all display. They are able to the last degree ; and the author has in an unusual
measure the power of acute and brilliant generalisation. He handles his array of
multifarious facts with ease and elegance ; and we must needs acknowledge (and we
do it willingly) that the Lectures are a real contribution to the settlement of the
vast and obscure question with which they are occupied." — Literary Churchman.

Works published by

Just published, in demy Svo, 570 pages, price 10s. 6d.,
MODERN DOUBT AND CHRISTIAN BELIEF.
%¦ 3nm oi ^jjolurjiiic gTrxiims abbasstb to (lamest
Mztktts after fctljj.
By THEODOBE CHBISTLIEB, D.D.,
UNIVERSITY PREACHER AND PROCESSOR OF THEOLOGY AT BONN.
Translated, with the Author's sanction, chiefly by the Rev. H. TJ. Weit-
beecht, Ph.D., and Edited by the Rev. T. L. Kingsbury, M.A.,
Vicar of Easton Royal, and Rural Dean.
CONTENTS.
FIRST LECTURE. —The Existing Breach between Modern Culture
and Christianity. — Introduction. — I. Causes of the Breach. II. Present
Extent of the Breach. III. Can the Breach be filled up?
SECOND LECTURE.— Reason and Revelation.— Whence do we
derive our knowledge of God ? — I. Natural Theology, or the Knowledge of
God derived from Nature and Reason ? II. Supernatural Theology, or the
Knowledge of God derived from Pvevelation. III. Relation between
Revealed Religion and Natural Theology.
THIRD LECTURE.— Modern Non-Biblioal Conceptions op God.—
Present Condition of the Controversy respecting the Idea of God. —
I. Atheism. II. Materialism. III. Pantheism. IV. Deism and Rational
ism. FOURTH LECTURE. —Theology op Scripture and op the Church. —
I. Biblical Theism. II. Trinitarian Conception of the Divine Nature.
FIFTH LECTURE.— The Modern Negation of Miracles.— Miracles
the greatest stumbling-block to the spirit of our age — The consequences
of their Negation — Annihilation of all Religions, and of the Moral Person
ality of Man — Fundamental importance of the question. — I. Nature and
Possibihty of Miracles. II. Necessity and Historical Manifestations of the
Miraculous. III. Are Miraculous Manifestations still vouchsafed?
SIXTH LECTURE. — Modern Anti-Miraculous Accounts of the
Life of Christ. — The Christological Problem, the great Theological
question of the present day — Variety in the Rationalistic methods of-
treating the Life of Christ — All combine in the denial of the Miraculous —
Rationalism and Mythicism. — I. Old Rationalistic Accounts of the Life of
Christ. II. Schenkel's " Sketch of the Character of Christ." III. Strauss'
" Life of Christ." IV. Renan's "Vie de Jesus."
SEVENTH LECTURE.— Modern Denials of the Resurrection.—
I. Anti-Miraculous Theories. II. The Historical Testimonies. III. Col
lapse of the "Visionary Hypothesis."
EIGHTH LECTURE.— The Modern Critical Theory op Primitive
Christianity. — The Tubingen School and its Founder, F. C. Baur. —
I. The Principles of the Tubingen School. II. Critique and Refutation
of this Theory.

T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh.

DR. LUTHARDT'S NEW WORK.

Just published, in demy 8vo, price 9s.,
ST. JOHN THE AUTHOR OF THE
FOURTH GOSPEL.
By Professor C. E. LUTHARDT,
AUTHOR OF "FQNDAMENTAL TE.T7THS OF CHKJSTIANIT1," ETC.
ffrHirsIatri* Httir i\t Iftteafatre feterpb-
By C. R. GREGORY, Leipzig.

Chap. I. Tradition. II. St. John's Authorship disputed. III. The-
Testimony of the Church. IV. Testimony outside of the Church.
"V". St. John's Residence at Ephesus. VI. The Passover Contro
versy. VII. The Testimony of the Gospel itself. VIII. St. John's
Gospel and the Second Century. IX. St. John's Gospel and the
Synoptists. X. St. John's Gospel and the Revelation. XI. St.
John's Christology psychologically possible. Appendix. — Litera
ture of the disputed Origin of the Fourth Gospel, from 1792 to the
present.
" A work which must be regarded as a very able and almost exhaustive summary
of the arguments in favour of the catholic tradition on this subject — exhaustive,
that is to say, in the present state of the question, and untiLnew evidence shall
have been discovered. Nothing can be more lucid or effective than the author's
method of arranging and presenting his arguments." — Scotsman.
" There are few works in the later theological literature which contain, in such a
confined space, such wealth of sober theological knowledge, and such an invulner
able phalanx of objective apologetical criticism." — Professor Guericlce.
" In this work, from the pen of one of the greatest divines of Germany, the
facts are made to speak for themselves, and the result is a complete refutation of
the Anti-Johannine school of criticism, and a correspondingly complete establish
ment of the truth on which the unanimous testimony of the ancient Church is
shown to rest. . . Such a work as this was much needed." — Dickinson's Quarterly..

Works published by

Just published, in demy Svo, price 7s. 6d.,
THE
MIRACLES OF OUR LORD
IN RELATION TO MODERN CRITICISM.

F. L. STEINMEYER, D.D.,
ORDINARY PR.0FESS0E, OF THEOLOGY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF BERLIN.
TRANSLATED, WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR, FROM
THE GERMAN BY

L. A. WHEATLEY.

Introduction. — The Problem. 2. Method of Solving it. 3. Value of
the Solution. Jesus as a Worker op Miracles.
Eirst Group. — Miracles considered as Signs of the Kingdom of Heaven.
Second Group. — Miracles considered as Symbols.
Third Group. — Miracles as Witnesses of the Power of the Kingdom of
Heaven.
Fourth Group. — Miracles as Prophecies.
" In this exegesis Dr. Steinmeyer displays a very high degree of critical acumen
and a rare subtlety and originality of thought. "Scotsman.
" We have read this excellent translation of Professor Steinmeyer's famous work
on Miracles with great satisfaction. It is a careful and masterly reply to Strauss—
to his attack on the historical veracity of the Gospels and on the reality of Biblical
Miracles. It is therefore, by anticipation, a, reply to 'Supernatural Religion.'
. , . We most cordially recommend the volume to young theological students. " —
Watchman. " This work will be found of great and lasting service in the cause of truth
against the sceptical .tendencies of the present eager age. . . The whole argument
is bold, masterly, and convincing ; and the essay will take its place among the
best recent volumes of Christian evidence."— Standard.

T. and T. Clark, Edinburgh.

Just published, Fourth Edition, pi-ice 6s.,
THE TRIPARTITE NATURE OF MAN,
SPIRIT, SOUL, AND BODY,
Applied to Illustrate and Explain the Doctrines of Original Sin, the
New Birth, the Disembodied State, and the Spiritual Body.
By Rev. J. B. HEARD, M.A.
WITS AN APPENDIX ON THE FATHERHOOD OF GOD.

" The author has got a striking and consistent theory. Whether agreeing or dis
agreeing with that theory, it is a book which any student of the Bible may read
with pleasure." — Guardian.
' ' A valuable and interesting treatise on the ' Tripartite Nature of Man/ the
first English theological work of any pretensions which has dealt with the subject
in a methodical and systematic manner." — Dean of Norwich.
" It is with considerable satisfaction we note the issue of a fourth edition of this
most original and valuable treatise, which, without exaggeration, may be described
as one of the ablest contributions to our theological literature which has been
published of late years." — English Independent.

In crown Svo, price 5s. }
VOICES OF THE PROPHETS.
Twelve Lectures Preached in the Chapel of Lincoln's Inn, in the
Years 1870-74, on the Foundation of Bishop Warburton.
By EDWARD HAMILTON GIFFORD, D.D.

" The author has long ago attained high position as a scholar, a man of science,
and a theologian, and in the volume before us he offers his readers some of the
best fruits of these varied accomplishments."— Standard.
"This volume deals with the subject of prophecy in a clear and forcible manner.
The objections to a belief in prophetic utterance are ably met, and much light is
thrown upon the matter, which has here been dealt with in a scholarly and
Christian spirit." — Rock.

Works published by T. and T. Clark.

DR. MURPHY'S NEW WORK.

Just published, in demy 8*0, 700 pages, price 15s.,
A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL COMMENTARY
ON THE
BOOK OF PSALMS,
WS.it\ a $jt*fo SErattsIaiiott.
By JAMES G. MURPHY, LL.D., T.O.D.,
AUTHOR OF COMMENTARIES ON THE BOOKS OF GENESIS, EXODUS, ETC.
" Every Bible student will look upon this volume with interest, and should give
warm thanks to the learned author for the care and erudition which have been
bestowed upon it. . . . The introductory chapters are very valuable, referring both
to the nature of the Psalms, their themes, their authors, and their arrangements.
The exegesis is admirable, and the spirit is devout." — Methodist Recorder.
Just published, in Two Vols. Svo, price 21s.,
A COMMENTARY
ON THE
GOSPEL OF ST. LUKE.
By F. GODET,
DOCTOR AND PROFESSOR. OF THEOLOGY, NEUCHATEL.
fratrsla^o from tfyt Stroiic J rnulj Coition.
" We are indebted to the publishers for an English translation of the admirable
work which stands at the head of this review. ... It is a work of great ability,
learning, and research." — Christian Observer.
" The whole book is very valuable, and is the work of a critic, scholar, and divine
of no ordinary attainments, who has devoted to it wonderful conscientiousness and
diligent care." — Union Review.